The Argentine government again blasted Judge Thomas Griesa for declaring 'illegal' the bill sent to Congress referred to the country's debt and creditors, and said the magistrate ignores national sovereignty and ignores how democratic institutions function.
The late Thursday heavy worded release from the Economy ministry headed by Axel Kicillof pointed out that once again the audience summoned by Judge Griesa ends with no resolution for any of the really important issues that have resulted from his ruling.
While the Judge insists with his 'incredible' position impeding Argentina to pay 2005 and 2010 restructured bondholders coupons, he does respond to the 'vulture funds' and calls for an audience to debate an alleged contempt of court by the Argentine republic.
Besides, in a ”new excess of jurisdiction and disregard for sovereignty, Judge Griesa gave his opinion over the 'illegality' of a bill that he did not even understand in all its extension (since he ignores central issues of it), and which was sent to Congress, as happens in any normal democratic State.
The fact he declared 'illegal' a bill sent by the Executive to Congress again gives evidence of his disregard of Argentine national sovereignty and his total ignorance on the functioning of democratic institutions. It wasn't enough to block payment to holders of bonds involved in the 2005 and 2010 restructuring and abuse of their jurisdiction. It wasn't enough to sow confusion with his sentence and his contradictory orders. Now he pretends, on request from the 'vulture funds', to impose conditions on Congress, which is the highest legislative branch of the Nation.
It would be far more constructive if Judge Griesa took time to read the fundamentals and the whole bill so that he can clear some of the many confusions which he has displayed in the latest audiences.
”It is obvious that Judge Griesa continues to immobilize the funds with the sole purpose of forcing the Argentine Republic to pay 'vulture funds'. Likewise he insists in pressing Argentina to make offers in violation of its legal system and its contracts, and with the risk of triggering the RUFO clause. The Judge insists that Argentina must negotiate, and refuses to see that in reality those whom do not negotiate are the 'vulture funds', that this is precisely why they are 'vulture', since they do not negotiate. Far from rendering justice and generating balanced conditions for both sides, the Judge only looks to favor the vulture funds.
And finally Argentina will continue working to generate fair, equitable, legal and sustainable conditions to honor its debts with 100% of its creditors.