Prosecutor assumes corruption files of the National District Prosecutor’s Office
The Attorney General’s Office assumed the investigation of several corruption files held at the National District Prosecutor’s Office, as part of a reengineering focused on the integral transformation of the investigations and the processes related to this crime.
Attorney general Miriam Germán Brito indicates that the cases had been referred to that instance “in a segmented manner and without defined criteria”.
She added that the complaints were sent on a discretionary basis to the District and without following any reasonable parameter to justify it. She explained that the aforementioned cases deserve to be investigated following the same objective parameters elaborated by the Public Ministry that she heads so that there is a standardized procedure.
The files include the complaint of corruption against officials of the National Institute for Comprehensive Early Childhood Care (INAIPI) for violation of Law 155-17 on Money Laundering.
In addition, the case of administrative corruption of the Metropolitan Office of Bus Services (OMSA) that involves Manuel Rivas Faustino and you share, as well as that of the State Sugar Council (CEA), headed by Pedro César Mota Pacheco and you share.
Another case is based on a complaint by Somos Pueblos against José del Castillo, for the alleged violation of the same legislation.
The files include the complaints filed against Ricardo Andrés Castillo Terrero for the alleged violation of Law 155-17 on Money Laundering and Law 340 on State Procurement and Contracting, presented to the Public Ministry on July 14 and June 20 by the lawyer Guido Gómez Mazara.
Also, those presented by the same lawyer, on May 12 and 25 of this year, as well as on June 26, against Gonzalo Castillo and Helidosa Aviation Group for alleged illicit enrichment and violation of Law 340.
The procedure is an advocation based on the powers conferred by the Organic Law of the Public Ministry (No. 133-11, of June 7, 2011), which in its article 30, paragraph 10, grants the Attorney General of the Republic the attribution of “assuming, by himself or through one of his deputies, any criminal process of public action that is promoted in the national territory when he deems it convenient to the public interest.”
“This certiorari will be preceded by a reasoned opinion to that effect and the transfer of responsibility for the management of the case entails, and it cannot be returned to the Public Ministry originally authorized,” says the order.
Remember that corruption investigations require comprehensive management that allows for the human capital and technical resources essential for the effective prosecution they demand. In this context, it recalls that “carrying out the investigation processes in various offices may violate the reasonable period that must be observed by mandate of the law”.
The attorney general had asked the District Attorney, Rosalba Ramos Castillo, by letter dated August 25th, for a list of the corruption cases found in that jurisdiction.
Then she granted a period of 48 hours for her referral to the Attorney General’s Office, where she will assume it together with a team of her management.
German Brito states that the Public Ministry takes “all the necessary measures” with the purpose of “guaranteeing the effective fulfillment of one of the most important objectives for the investigative body of the Dominican Republic: to prosecute corruption cases with efficient results.”
She recalls, in one of her recitals, that the United Nations (UN) Convention against Corruption defines this scourge as “an insidious plague that has a wide spectrum of corrosive consequences for society.”