Argentina: Charges Against Ex-President Macri Filed After Explosive Intelligence Find

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – The Argentinean judiciary has opened an investigation into ex-President Mauricio Macri and five other individuals for illegal espionage. A complaint filed by the Prosecutor’s Office was granted by a Federal Court under Judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi.

Macri, who ruled Argentina between 2015 and 2019, is suspected of having been responsible for the illegal surveillance of over 80 public figures by the AFI (Federal Intelligence Agency), which was directly under his authority.

The charges are based on a complaint filed by the new Head of the AFI, Cristina Caamaño. Caamaño was appointed after Macri lost the election to his successor Alberto Fernández, with the specific task of ensuring transparency in the finances and political affiliations within the agency.

In her complaint against Macri, Gustavo Arribas, the former head of the AFI, his deputy Silvia Majdalani and three other officials, Caamaño specifically alleges that secret intelligence operations are directly under the responsibility of the head of state. It was therefore inconceivable that surveillance was conducted without his instructions, knowledge or authorization.

“The arbitrary operations carried out by the agency during the preceding government were not ordered or authorized by any judge, which was a gross violation of constitutional regulations,” says Caamaño.

As part of internal investigations, AFI personnel came across a hard-drive that had been inadequately wiped and could thus be recovered. The hard-drive contained the e-mail correspondence of over 80 public figures, which had been intercepted without any court order. The examination of the data showed that surveillance had begun in June 2016, six months after Mauricio Macri took office.

The victims include politicians, journalists, trade unionists, political activists and even several police officers. The targets of this illegal espionage were not only members of the opposition, but also representatives and sympathizers of the ‘Cambiemo’ political alliance of the time, including several politicians of the Radical Party and the then-governor of the province of Rio Negro.

Gabriela Cerrutti, a member of the current government alliance ‘Frente de Todos’ and herself a victim, was not surprised by the existence of illegal surveillance during the Macri government: “Macri used espionage to persecute opposition members and put pressure on his own officials and judges”.

Elizabeth Gómez Alcorta, now Minister for Women, Gender and Diversity and formerly the attorney of imprisoned social activist Milagro Sala, reacted similarly. In recent years there had been many reports of the AFI’s illegal activities, she said. She recalled that in January 2018 a computer containing client data had been stolen from her law firm, presumably as part of a common robbery.

Now that the investigation proceedings against Macri, Arribas and others have been opened, the interrogation of AFI staff members as well as additional forensic investigations of the hard-drive, and a detailed examination of its contents are imminent. The Prosecutor’s Office also requested the disclosure of the personal data of all employees hired between 2015 and 2019, as well as all instructions issued in connection with the illegal espionage. Should the evidence be substantiated, criminal proceedings may be initiated.

This is not the first time that Mauricio Macri has been accused of promoting illegal espionage as the head of a government office. During his term as Mayor of the City of Buenos Aires (2007-2015), he was suspected of having been in charge of setting up an illegal espionage network within the city council.

According to the accusation, this network had been able to wiretap the phones of several individuals over the years by manipulating judicial investigation files. In 2010, charges were brought against Macri. However, on December 29th, 2015, about three weeks after Macri took office as President, proceedings were dropped, allegedly due to lack of evidence.