Bills to make plea-bargaining and asset-recovery applicable in cases of corruption and in other crimes are being discussed at Congress.

The implementation of plea-bargaining in corruption cases was proposed by Mauricio Macri during his Presidential campaign. In recent months this initiative has been sponsored by the Executive Branch and by several political parties.

On June 23, 2016, the House of Representatives approved –with 194 votes in favor and 5 against– a bill based on previous drafts (the “Bill”). The Bill will now be discussed in the Senate.

Plea-bargaining is not new in our legal system since it is applicable to drug-related crimes, terrorism, kidnapping, human-trafficking and money-laundering. However, the Bill seeks to add plea-bargaining in article 41 to the Criminal Code and extend its application to cases involving bribes, traffic of influences, contraband, prostitution and child pornography, customs crimes, terrorism financing, racketeering, misuse of public goods, illegal enrichment, fraud against public administration and crimes against the economic and financial order.

According to the Bill, those prosecuted or condemned for any of the above-mentioned crimes may obtain certain benefits such as penalty reductions or other procedural benefits when they provide the Courts with precise information, that can be validated, is veracious, and which contributes to prevent the beginning, developing or accomplishing of said crimes. Such benefits would also apply when this information helps clarifying facts, revealing the identity or whereabouts of criminals, identifying illegal goods or profits or the sources of financing of the criminal organizations involved.

The Bill does not allow plea-bargaining to be applied in cases of public officers who may be subject to impeachment such as the president, vice-president, chief of cabinet, ministers and members of the Supreme Court. The Bill also forbids using plea-bargaining in cases of crimes against humanity.

In order to avoid misuses of plea-bargaining, the Bill sets forth penalties of 4 to 10 years imprisonment for those who provide false or imprecise information when aiming at obtaining any of the benefits.

The evidence obtained through plea-bargaining agreements signed by and between the accused and homologated by the Court could only be used in the proceedings motivating the collaboration or in other related proceedings and may not be the only grounds for sentencing.

On June 23, 2016, the House of Representatives also approved a bill that seeks to make asset-recovery applicable to assets obtained by means of illegal activities. This bill, which will now be discussed in the Senate, sets forth that the forfeiture would need to be decided by means of a Court ruling that transfers the domain to the State without granting compensation of any kind in return.

If these bills are approved by the Senate, a major enhancement in the fight against corruption could occur in a way never seen before in Argentina.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.