Abgeschickt von rolf am 26 Januar, 2006 um 14:49:51
It went yesterday that two bottoms vulture obtained a decision of embargo of u$s 105 million pertaining to the Central bank of the Argentine Republic, within the framework beyond the conducted judicial presentations in New York by default of the country that still continues. The plaintiffs are command post Limited (pertaining to the Dart family) and the Capital NML (of the Elliot bottom) those that aimed to block the transferences that the organization was making that within the framework directs Martín Redrado of the total cancellation of the debt to the IMF. The presentation of the bottoms vulture was accepted the 30 of December (the payment to the equal international organism took shape the 3 of January) by judge Jones - it is in replacement of Thomas Griesa in the courts of the South District of New York-but soon there was a failure in favor of Argentina. Thursday the 12 of the current bottoms vulture presented/displayed an appeal to the Camera, and therefore those u$s 105 million of the Central bank (the amount in fact could be greater) followed obstructed. All the process made remember to also the happened thing in New York once the exchange of the debt in March took shape and the bottoms vulture managed to stop the delivery of the new bonds to those who accepted the supply since the old papers in default were obstructed. The then situation was defined by the Court of appeal in favor of the country but complicó the final closing of the reconstruction of the debt. * Hearing The 6 of last January were a telephone hearing in that the lawyers of the creditors participated and by the Argentine government Jonathan Blackman, Carmine Boccuzzi and Michael Byars pertaining to the Cleary study, Gottlieb, Steen and Hamiltion. The Central bank was represented by Joseph Neuhaus of the Sullivan study and Cromwell. Parallelly also the payment to the IMF had effects in Germany. The Argentine defense used there like justification of the nonpayment to the economic emergency that lives the country. The turn to the international organism gatilló requested so that the judgments activate something that now is in the Supreme Court of that country. Financial Ambito acceded to the transcription of the telephone conference arrives mentioned in which the raised situation is detailed. These were the arguments used then: * The 15 of December the President of Argentina by executive decree, had u$s 9,000 million that belonged to the Central bank for the payment of the debt to the IMF. This way he changed what they were active or reserves of the BCRA in assets of Argentina to be used with a commercial intention that is repago of a debt. These assets we thought that they were either in the Federal Reserve of New York or in some of the banks correspondents of the Central bank. Let us think that because those assets were now property of Argentina in New York, and to be used for a commercial activity, they were available for embargo (Robert Cohen of the Capital NML). * Near u$s 105 million in the Federal Reserve were obstructed and many million more. We exactly do not know how much in transit through banks correspondents. He is completely erroneous what one says that those bottoms have happened to be of the Argentine State for the use that it describes. The decree at issue did not change the rights of property of the reserves which are and will be of the property of the Central bank. What the decree says is that the superior reserves of the Central bank can be used to a single intention that is to pay to international organisms. It is an historical function of the Central bank the one to pay to organisms. He is intermediary between the government and the IMF. These bottoms are being used for classic functions of the Central bank.... They have constructed this theory of the appropriation when nothing has permission to go into the reserves. They are still classically subject reserves of the Central bank and with the exception of not being obstructed. (Joseph Neuhaus by the BCRA) * The law (approved by the Congress on the basis of the presidential decree) had a single intention that is the one to give more flexibility to the use of the reserves of the Central bank to pay debts that it has reflected in his balance. The government, instead of reimbursing to him to the Power station, which gave him was a payment obligation that happens interests. The reserves cannot be obstructed (Jonathan Blackman by the government). * In my rudimentary concept of the property law, if the bottoms belonged to the Central bank, the Power station paid to the IMF and would be an creditor and the Argentine Republic indebted of money of the Power station. I do not conceive then that (the payment to the IMF) is possession of the Republic (Court). * In the decree and the approved law the property of this category of reserves in excess of those necessary ones was transferred to support the monetary base of Argentina, so that it can pay his obligations to the IMF. I grant that the treated subjects are complex but I believe that as the Court submerges in the evidence it will be clear that this is what has happened. There were negotiations between the Central bank and the Argentine Republic about how it was going to perhaps enter this in his books because there was preoccupation of which it was happening. They gave a title him to the Power station in compensation but they were not forced to do it (Dennis Hranitzky of command post Limited). * There is nothing in the decretoejecutivo that speaks of property transference. It is an authorization to use reserves available freely to pay to the IMF, that is what happened. And the money that obstructed in New York in addition was not destined to that aim (J. Blackman).