The Public Ministry asked the judges of the first collegiate court in the national district to suspend the hearing of the trial followed by the six involved in the Odebrecht case, so that the secretariat of the Supreme Court of Justice certifies the delivery of evidence to encartados.
Mirna Ortiz, litigation coordinator of the Special Prosecutor’s Office for the Prosecution of Administrative Corruption (Pepca), before filing an opposition appeal against the court’s decision refusing to include two key pieces of evidence, asked the court to grant compliance with that part of the trial.
Also, the judges did not conclude with their motions, Pepca prosecutors and the technical defense of the defendants withdrew to deliberate to return with a decision in this regard.
However, the technical defense of the defendant Andrés Bautista, who made the request not to include these two tests in the trial, asked the judges to reject the request for postponement.
Likewise, the other defense of the defendants joined the motion to reject the postponement of the trial, as in their opinion it is not the procedural moment and that the Public Ministry reserved them to file the opposition appeal.
They claim that the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not present any reason to justify its motion to suspend the trial and, consequently, it must be rejected by the court.
The Public Ministry’s motion comes after the court refused to include as documentary evidence in the process two pieces of evidence in which the Brazilian multinational admits its guilt for paying bribes in the country, from 2001 to 2014.
Likewise, the leniency agreement between the Brazilian public minister, the United States Department of Justice and the Swiss Attorney General’s Office.