Córdoba: trial pending against Surrbac leadership for alleged fraud

After years of delays, the case against the leadership of Surrbac is moving toward a public trial in Córdoba over alleged fund diversion schemes. The Federal Chamber rejected an appeal that prevented the integration of the money laundering segment with other facts and facilitated a unified and thorough criminal process. The decision allows for a joint investigation of conduct that the prosecution describes as using the union for private benefit and illicit enrichment.

Among those sent to trial are the historic leaders of the collectors' union, Mauricio Saillén and Pascual Catrambone  and relatives  whom the prosecution identifies as alleged beneficiaries of irregular operations. The referral to trial groups together cases of illicit association, fraud, and aggravated usury for a comprehensive examination of responsibilities. Prosecutors argue that the mutual and the health insurance fund may have been used as channels to divert resources to associates of the leadership.

The court, with votes from Falcucci and Díaz Gavier, suspended the trial until the money laundering investigation is completed. This sought a comprehensive judgment that would include the prior offenses of the main case, such as illicit association and fraud. The measure allowed all related facts to be addressed simultaneously and coherently, including aggravated usury.

In the same ruling, unanimously, Falcucci, Díaz Gavier, and Asís rejected the claim that the union leaders did not pay 751 thousand dollars. Saillén and Catrambone offered 30 thousand to the plaintiff Diego Venancio Ferreyra and 70 thousand to Surrbac. The remaining 651 thousand dollars were offered by the accused and other members to be donated to public institutions.

Comprehensive trial and procedural background

The Chamber upheld the rejection of the nullity raised by one of the defendants and thus supported the continuation of the process toward the oral stage. The judges considered that there were no formal defects preventing the inclusion of the money laundering segment in the same main case. The file must now be sent to the oral court to set deadlines, witnesses, and the schedule of relevant public hearings.

TOF1 had ordered the suspension of the trial until the investigation into money laundering was completed to avoid partial and disconnected trials. That precaution aimed to prevent isolated facts from being judged without considering the economic framework that, according to the prosecution, supported the fraud. With the integration of the money laundering segment, hypotheses increase regarding an organized operation to divert members' funds to third parties.

Prosecutors are reconstructing an operation that includes loan contracts, informal loans, and transfers with alleged profit motives. Transfers, shell companies, and allocations that could link the reported funds to relatives' assets are being investigated. The defenses offered partial reparations that were evaluated and rejected due to doubts about the traceability and origin of the funds.

Among the proposals were payments to the plaintiff and donations to the mutual that were unconvincing due to a lack of clarity about their origin. The prosecution refused to close the case with contributions of dubious origin because that could prevent a real clarification of the facts. The accusation targets accountants, treasurers, and proxies who, according to the prosecution, facilitated the execution of schemes to benefit the leadership.

Network of alleged abuses and family ties

Companies linked to relatives and construction firms are identified as having allegedly been used to give a veneer of legality to suspicious funds. Investigators detected purchases of real estate and vehicles in the names of associates that could be part of money laundering circuits related to the scheme. Contracts and businesses are also being investigated that, if confirmed, would show conflicts of interest and misuse of union funds.

The process also investigates bidding contracts and businesses that, if confirmed, would demonstrate conflicts of interest and misuse of union resources. Among those identified are those responsible for the financial management of the union who allegedly authorized checks and transactions to support the scheme. If the charges are proven at trial, the evidence could show that the union operated as a structure intended for personal profit.

The prosecution warned of evidence concealment, deleted messages, and procedures designed to frustrate the complete reconstruction of events. The existence of assets abroad and corporate structures that allegedly served to safeguard assets of dubious origin is mentioned. Because of that risk, precautionary measures were promoted to prevent the disposal of assets and to ensure victim compensation.

Procedural risks, evidence, and public expectation

Cassation appeals filed by some defendants are still pending, which may delay the formal referral to the oral court. Nevertheless, the Chamber's confirmation reduced room for maneuver and limited alternatives to postpone the start of the public trial. If the process reaches public debate, the court will have to evaluate abundant documentary evidence, expert reports, and testimonies from those affected.

Public expectation is that the judiciary will determine whether the union leadership was used as a front for systematic criminal conduct. The Surrbac case shows, according to the accusation, a pattern of operation in which union representation was diverted to private interests. If confirmed, convictions and restitution measures could set a precedent regarding the criminal liability of union officials.

Accounting expert evidence and testimonies from former employees could be decisive in reconstructing the alleged criminal circuit. The process demands transparency so that society can know whether union structures were essentialized for private gain. Closing the case without a public trial would have a democratic cost by leaving alleged fraudulent management conduct unpunished.