YPF trial: The government targeted Kicillof and defended national sovereignty

The Office of the Treasury Attorney submitted new documents in the context of the trial over the expropriation of YPF. The Government warned about irreparable damage if control of the shares is transferred to Burford Capital and pointed out that Axel Kicillof's statements harm Argentina's position.

Judicial filing: Argentina insists on halting the transfer of shares

In a new chapter of the trial over the expropriation of YPF in United States courts, the Argentine Government submitted two briefs to Judge Loretta Preska to reinforce its request to suspend the "turnover" order of the state shares to Burford Capital. The country was ordered at first instance to pay more than 16 billion dollars, and now faces the risk of losing control over 51% of the oil company.

From the Office of the Treasury Attorney, which leads the State's legal defense, officials stated that the ruling raises "unsolved legal issues" and represents an "unprecedented case" that even contradicts the position of the United States government itself in similar cases.

Criticism of Kicillof and warnings about damage to YPF

One of the striking points of the filing was the mention of public statements by Buenos Aires Governor Axel Kicillof, cited by the plaintiffs as part of their opposition to the suspension request. The Government replied that Kicillof doesn't represent the current national administration and that his opinions are not part of the official legal strategy. However, officials acknowledged that his public interventions "hinder and worsen Argentina's position."

In the brief, the State's defense warned that complying with the court order would mean "violating Law 26.741 on hydrocarbon sovereignty" and would leave Argentina without control over its main energy company. According to their argument, this would trigger contractual clauses that could require YPF to make advance payments to creditors, affecting more than 23,000 employees, the provinces, and bondholders.

Legal risks and ongoing appeal

The Government also questioned the legality of transferring shares that are not physically located in the United States, noting that there is no Second Circuit precedent allowing the enforcement of sovereign assets outside the territory. In addition, officials emphasized that there is no urgency on the part of the plaintiffs and that the status quo should be maintained until the appeal is solved.

Meanwhile, the Office of the Treasury Attorney indicated that if Preska doesn't grant the suspension of the ruling, it will proceed with a formal appeal before the Second Circuit Court in New York, which will include a new request for a precautionary suspension.

Public interest and defense of sovereignty

The State's attorneys emphasized that immediate enforcement could cause a large-scale economic and political impact. In addition, officials recalled that any transfer of state shares requires approval from the Argentine Congress, which would make compliance with the ruling unfeasible.

"This is a complex, unprecedented process in which no harm to the plaintiffs has been demonstrated. The Republic will continue litigating in defense of sovereignty and the public interest," official sources stated.