Court Reviews Reinstating Plaintiffs in $LIBRA Crypto Fraud Case
Judicial ruling may reopen investigation involving President Javier Milei's alleged crypto promotion.
1Court Reopens Procedural Review
The Federal Chamber of Criminal Cassation, specifically Sala II, has accepted complaints from two investor groups seeking to regain plaintiff status in the $LIBRA case. Judges Alejandro Slokar and Ángela Ledesma voted in favor, while Guillermo Yacobucci dissented. This decision challenges the recent closure of the investigation regarding eleven individuals, including President Javier Milei.
2Exclusion of Affected Investors
Investors were previously removed as plaintiffs on July 3 by Judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi, following a request by lobbyist Mauricio Novelli. This exclusion left the investigation solely under the prosecutor's control, leading to the dismissal of all charges on October 23. Investors argue their removal was never legally finalized, necessitating this current judicial appeal.
3Diverse Group of Claimants
The claimants include five Argentine nationals and two Belarusian citizens, Lapchenko Vladislav Andreevich and Krasutskaya Sviatlana Vitalievna. These investors are organized into two distinct legal groups. One group is led by Martín Romeo, while the other, represented by attorney Nicolás Rechanik, receives legal support from social leader Juan Grabois to challenge the case dismissal.
4Upcoming Legal Deadlines
The court has established a ten-day window for legal teams to submit formal arguments. Following this, a hearing will be held to determine if the investors will be reinstated as plaintiffs. If successful, these parties would gain the legal standing required to formally appeal the October 23 ruling that cleared the President and others.
5Administrative Investigation Intervention
The Procuraduría de Investigaciones Administrativas (PIA), led by prosecutor Sergio Rodríguez, has formally requested the reopening of the case. The PIA argues that the investigation remains incomplete and seeks to replace prosecutor Eduardo Taiano. They contend that the dismissal was premature and failed to account for necessary evidence collection regarding the alleged fraud.
6Critique of Investigative Methods
The PIA explicitly criticized the previous dismissal for lacking depth, noting that investigators failed to perform essential blockchain analyses. Prosecutors had previously discarded these technical measures, citing a lack of specialized software. The PIA maintains that alternative methods were available and that the current investigation stage is insufficient to justify a total case closure.
7Allegations of Market Deception
The investigation centers on whether the $LIBRA project was designed to lure investors through deceptive endorsements, including those linked to President Milei, before orchestrating a financial exit. The PIA argues that the unregulated nature of memecoins does not grant promoters immunity, suggesting the evidence points toward a coordinated effort to defraud participants.
8Broader Judicial Implications
This development highlights a significant conflict between judicial oversight and prosecutorial discretion in high-profile financial cases. By questioning the impartiality of the initial dismissal, the Cassation Court's intervention signals a potential shift in how the judiciary handles crypto-related fraud allegations. The outcome will determine if the case proceeds to a full trial.