The decision of Chamber II of the Chamber –headed by Martín Irurzun- again entrusted Servini to define a more limited period than the initial one of almost 3 and a half years of Macri's mandate, after he prospered , adding to the vote of the transferred judge Leopoldo Bruglia, a complaint from the former President alleging invasion of his privacy. But, despite the ambiguity of its wording, it ratified the rejection of the nullity proposal of the measure filed by Lanusse. And he ended up agreeing with the judge that she should not destroy the crossover reports provided and commissioned from Dajudeco. It was a dart for elevation given that the Chamber sought to exempt the body that carries out the wiretaps from any leakage due to the content of the reports on who Macri communicated with from future responsibility. This could exceed the Oil case, given the frequency of contacts that were derived radially from the highest authorities of the Executive Power to the advisers linked to the Judicial Board and eventually with magistrates in charge of sensitive causes for involving political objectives , as in the case of Oil. Irurzun is also in charge of the Dajudeco.
The new guidelines that the judge will set according to the Chamber's instruction will be again objected by Macri with two axes. The double meaning is, on the one hand, to block the progress of the case in the hands of Servini but also to prevent part of the period indicated in the new period from being evaluated as evidence because it could trigger new lines of investigation. The first step of that strategy was this Friday to make it known through spokesmen linked to the former president that there was a new brake on the interlocking of the Chamber and that this implied its suspension.
It appears from the Chamber's report that the judge is precisely underlined that she did well not to destroy the entire report sent by Dajudeco. That is, it is already in your possession. What the judge must do is assess the evidence in a more limited period within the elements that it already has something that had already been analyzed by the Chamber at the time of considering that the evidence measure that Servini requested, it was unappealable, beyond the former president's protest.
Faced with this scenario, Macri will attack again when the dates on which the evidence will be evaluated in writings that his defenders are preparing are known.