Cristina will continue with an electronic ankle monitor and restrictions on receiving visitors.

The court recalled that house arrest constitutes an exceptional regime, subject to ongoing judicial oversight, and that the conditions could be reviewed if current circumstances change. It also clarified that the place of sentence enforcement will not be modified, and that any intervention regarding the use of public space around the residence falls exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Government of the City of Buenos Aires.

In its ruling of more than one hundred pages, the Cassation Chamber held that Cristina Kirchner's house detention conditions respect her rights and guarantee the effective enforcement of the sentence. It highlighted that her family, legal, and medical circle has unrestricted access, and that the list of visitors may be expanded with judicial authorization.

Additionally, it recalled that Law 27.375 establishes the use of electronic ankle monitors as a rule in these cases, and that it can only be omitted if there are favorable reports from oversight agencies.

The Federal Criminal Cassation Chamber ruled to maintain the current conditions of house arrest imposed on Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, sentenced to six years of imprisonment for fraudulent administration in the Vialidad case.

The country's highest criminal court rejected the defense's motions that requested to further ease the regime, particularly the removal of the electronic ankle monitor and the relaxation of the visitation system.

The ruling was issued by judges Gustavo Hornos, Mariano Borinsky, and Diego Barroetaveña. In the majority opinion, the court held that both electronic monitoring and visitation restrictions "allow for effective judicial oversight" and guarantee "legal protection against procedural and personal security risks" for the former president.

Hornos emphasized that the enforcement of sentences for corruption offenses must go beyond mere formality and that the law must be applied equally to all citizens, regardless of the rank or public exposure of the convicted individual, in reference to Article 16 of the National Constitution.