Latin America
Related: About this forumJudge Threatens Argentina Following Lawsuit Filed Against US
Published on Friday, August 08, 2014
by Common Dreams
Judge Threatens Argentina Following Lawsuit Filed Against US
After Argentina filed a suit in international court on Thursday, on Friday a US judge threatened the country with a contempt-of-court order
by Max Ocean, editorial intern
?itok=HNzRa_fi
[font size=1]
An image common to see plastered around Buenos Aires recently proclaims "enough vultures: Argentina is united for a national cause." (Credit: flickr/cc/Benjamin Dumas)[/font]
Argentina filed a suit against the United States in the Hague's International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Thursday in an attempt to force an international resolution to the dispute that caused the country's default last month.
In response to the lawsuit, Judge Thomas Griesawho made the initial ruling that forced Argentina's default called a hearing at 3 p.m. on Friday, in which he threatened a contempt-of-court order if Argentina doesn't stop issuing what he says are false statements from Argentine officials that the country payed its debt. "There has been no payment," said Griesa.
Argentina maintains that it hasn't actually defaulted, since it made a $539 million interest payment on one of its bonds that is due in 2033. But the default was technically triggered after that payment was frozen in a Bank of New York Mellon account by Griesa on the grounds that the country must also pay the hold-out investors in full if it wishes to make payments to the investors that agreed to a restructuring of Argentina's debt payments in 2005.
The suit filed on Thursday alleges that the country's sovereignty was violated by U.S. court decisions that the country must pay in full its debts to the so-called 'vulture funds' that bought the country's debt for pennies on the dollar back in 2001. The suit is "against the United States of America for the activity of its judicial power," but is "not an action against the country," in the words of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. "It simply means that dependent powers or dependent employees of that country have provoked damage or have acted outside of the law, considering the expressions and resolutions of a municipal judge who wants to trample sovereignty," according to Kirchner.
Eric LeCompte, Executive Director of the religious anti-poverty coalition, Jubilee USA Network, said that the suit's filing "illustrates that we need basic rules of responsible lending and borrowing in place in order to stop predators.
"If we had an international bankruptcy process, countries from Argentina to Grenada never would default and predatory actors are forced to sit at the table," LeCompte continued.
More:
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/08/08/judge-threatens-argentina-following-lawsuit-filed-against-us
The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)I would say contempt of his court is not a crime but a duty....
Judi Lynn
(160,217 posts)[center]
He doesn't look like someone who would be willing to reconsider, either, unfortunately.
[/center]
Judi Lynn
(160,217 posts)8/02/2014 @ 12:19PM
Argentina's Press Office Takes On Judge Griesa And The American Judiciary
It is fair to say that Argentinas government has been no fan of Judge Thomas Griesa and his court ever since he ruled in favour of the hold-out investors in a long-standing dispute stemming from Argentinas last default in 2001; the decision, ultimately, led to Argentinas second default last week (see Second Time Around for more). Now, the press office of the Embassy of Argentina in Washington DC has taken to weighing in on the judge and his colleagues.
A few moments ago I received a press release from the embassy entitled: For the benefit of vulture funds, Judge Griesa continues without resolving anything.
Argentina has long since passed any need for diplomatic nuance in its communications its in default and recession, so one can understand the national mood and here are a few choice remarks within it about Judge Griesa or Special Master Daniel Pollack (that is, the person appointed by Judge Griesa to mediate between Argentina and the bondholders, and whom Argentina have applied to have removed).
Pollack
has shown an overt bias in favor of the vulture funds.
(Pollack's) inability as a mediator to find a solution that doesnt exclusively benefit the vulture funds.
Once again, the judge called for a hearing without resolving absolutely anything.
Far from keeping the status quo, he (Judge Griesa) favours the vulture funds.
This potential millionaire scam.
The defaulted funds they (vulture funds) bought at a vile price
Still, Argentina is not just randomly chucking slogans around here; the points of principle at stake here are quite technical. The broader objection is that these hold-out creditors are not people who lost money when Argentina first defaulted if it was, their actions would be easier to understand. Instead, they (or most of them) bought up the bonds for very little in the aftermath of default, but are now trying to get their full value, despite the fact that they never lost money on the original purchase.
Beyond that, Argentina alleges that the same vulture funds (Im using Argentinas terminology here) have bought credit default swaps in order to profit from Argentinas default, thus playing both sides of the trade to the disadvantage of Argentina itself.
More:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswright/2014/08/02/argentinas-press-office-takes-on-judge-griesa-and-the-american-judiciary/
Bacchus4.0
(6,837 posts)A US State Department spokeswoman today told Buenosairesherald.com that the US would not agree to grant jurisdiction in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, following Argentina's intention to sue the North American country in the world court over its sovereign debt dispute.
The spokeswoman said the world court is not an appropriate venue for the matter and that Argentina should negotiate with its creditors.
The US had to agree to grant the international court jurisdiction for the case to proceed.
http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/166649/us-rejects-to-grant-jurisdiction-in-the-hague-over-argentine-debt-case
Judi Lynn
(160,217 posts)Did Argentina Default or Not? Its More Than Semantics
Analysis by Fabiana Frayssinet
BUENOS AIRES, Aug 4 2014 (IPS) - Argentinas supposed default, an unprecedented case in the history of world capitalism, sets a legal, political and financial precedent that indicates the need for concrete measures regarding the fine line between legal, ethical business activities and criminal usury.
In the debate, the orthodox financial sectors say Argentinas failure to comply with U.S. Judge Thomas Griesas ruling means it has once again defaulted, while others argue that it has actually honoured its commitments and made its payments, and the fact that the funds have not reached the creditors is not the governments fault.
Preventing someone from paying is not default, said President Cristina Fernández in a Jul. 31 nationally televised address, after a meeting with the so-called vulture funds opportunistic investors who purchase the debt of heavily indebted countries at pennies to the dollar and then vigorously pursue full repayment in court which failed to come up with a solution to the conflict.
Now they invented a new term: selective default. It doesnt exist. Preventing someone from taking our payments is not default. I told them they would have to invent a new word, she said with irony.
More:
http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/08/did-argentina-default-or-not-its-more-than-semantics/