abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

هذه الصفحة غير متوفرة باللغة العربية وهي معروضة باللغة English

المحتوى متاح أيضًا باللغات التالية: English, español

المقال

22 ديسمبر 2020

الكاتب:
Guapinol Resiste

Court of Appeals Must Favorably Resolve Writ of Amparo and Immediately Release Guapinol Defenders

...The legal team has turned to the court in La Ceiba as a result of the ruling made on December 19 by Judge Guifarro, which was not legally sound and lacked justification. She declared the petition to substitute the preventive measure of pretrial detention without merit, stating the legal defense provided no new elements to consider during the hearing. However, the judge failed to make a detailed analysis of the defense's arguments and did not consider the bond they offered, clearly demonstrating her connection with Walter Sánchez and Angie Destephen of the Tocoa Prosecutor's Office to criminalize the defenders in order to advance the economic interests of the Inversiones Los Pinares mining company which operates in the area without the consent of the affected population.

During the hearing, which was held on December 18, neither Prosecutor Sanchez nor the lawyer for Inversiones Los Pinares presented well-founded legal reasons for maintaining the precautionary measure of preventive detention. There are no legitimate elements for the application of the precautionary measure, as clearly outlined by the defense team and independent legal experts. The ruling does not respect international conventions nor constitutional and legal rights.

As result, on December 20, the defense team filed an appeal to revoke the ruling. However, Judge Guifarro denied the processing of the appeal, citing the suspension of legal terms for the year-end vacations. Dissatisfied with her decision, and citing Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the defense attorneys argued that the vacation term does not apply to criminal matters and that there should be an immediately resolution. They filed the writ of amparo directly to the Appeals Court on December 22...

الجدول الزمني