May 1, 2026 at – 10:34
Lawyer Rodrigo Yódice described the Public Ministry’s accusation as a “mamotreto” lacking legal basis. He denounced that the process is a tool of “reputational punishment” against the editorial line of ABC Color, ignoring key evidence such as the comprehensive repair of damages and the real nature of the trusts.
For the technical defense of Banco Atlas, the accusation presented in the last hours evidence a total submission of the State Attorney General’s Office to factors of political power. Dr. Rodrigo Yodicelegal representative of the entity, broke down the points of the tax accusation, calling it an “irresponsible adventure” and a direct attack on freedom of expression.
Below are the central axes with which the defense dismantles the thesis of the Public Ministry:
1. The “base crime” died: The reparation of Conmebol
One of Yódice’s most compelling arguments lies in the extinction of criminal action. Money laundering is a “second level” crime that requires a preceding event (injury of trust).
However, there is an agreement where Conmebol itself admits to having been fully repaired upon receiving US$51 million from the heirs of Nicolás Leoz. “If the victim says that he has no property damage and desists from all action, the preceding crime is extinguished. Without a base, there can be no washing,” explained the lawyer.
Read more: Hidden pact: Conmebol “exonerated” the Leoz family of any punishable act
2. Ignorance about the trust business
Yódice was blunt in pointing out that the Prosecutor’s Office demonstrates an “absolute ignorance” of legal science by stating that the funds became the property of Banco Atlas.
- Autonomous Heritage: The lawyer clarified that the Savings Deposit Certificates (CDA) were transferred to an autonomous estate, totally independent of the bank’s accounting.
- Unshielded: The prosecution maintains that the trust was used to “shield” money from justice. However, the trust agreement stipulated that, in the event of any judicial measure, those funds were available to respond. “The contract itself refutes the shielding thesis,” he stressed.
3. Selectivity and media “shootout”
The defense questions why the Prosecutor’s Office only targets Banco Atlas when Nicolás Leoz operated with multiple plaza banks. In fact, just a month before the operation with Atlas, Leoz established an identical trust in another banking entity with funds coming from abroad, he said.
“Why is this operation legal for the Prosecutor’s Office and that of Atlas is not? Because here there is a line reduction to hit companies linked to the newspaper ABC Color“, denounced Yódice, linking the persecution to journalistic criticism about the businesses of Alejandro Domínguez and the failed Qatar fuel case.
4. “Filling” and empty content tests
The indictment, which consists of 128 pages, was described by the defender as “full of emptiness”. According to Yódice, the Public Ministry offers evidence that has not even been incorporated or processed yet, which shows that the objective is not justice, but reputational damage.
“The Public Ministry offers evidence that has not yet been incorporated into the investigation. If the investigation is already concluded, why does it offer evidence that it does not even know what it will bring as information? Because Clearly the investigation is not completed. But since there is a drop in line here, this eyesore occurred,” he said.
Going back to the point of alleged money launderingYódice explains that in reality it is attributed to individuals linked to Banco Atlas and at no time are amounts mentioned.
“In the only moment in which it is related to an amount purportedly as special confiscation, The Prosecutor’s Office is the one that refers to the need to confiscate 780 thousand dollars, coming from alleged profits or benefits that the trust entity had throughout the administration of the trusts. That sum of money deposited in a judicial account remains at the disposal of the State while the process is being carried out,” he said.
rated as “total irresponsibility” that persistent intimidation ultimately results in the hypothetical gain from an illicit act being US$780,000.
Read more: Prosecutors “traced” orders from Conmebol even to raid the SIB
What’s next?
The defense raised exceptions of prescription and lack of action that the Court must rule before any preliminary hearing. “We hope that the jurisdictional body acts with right conscience and applies the law, verifying the absolute impossibility of this tax hypothesis,” Yódice concluded.
