A tribunal of penal guarantees has sentenced Aquiles Alvarez and four co-defendants to six years and eight months in prison for the illegal marketing of hydrocarbons in Ecuador.
The court handed down the identical six-year and eight-month prison terms to Alvarez, Raúl Zambrano, Juan Dionisio Araujo, Édgar Moisés Flores, and Édgar Edmundo Campoverde after convicting them as direct authors of the crime in the Triple A case.
Judges explained that the offense was committed with the participation of two or more people. Because at least one aggravating circumstance was present, the tribunal applied the maximum statutory penalty increased by one third.
Four other defendants convicted as accomplices received lighter sentences proportionate to those of the main perpetrators. Lady Cedeño, Jessenia Vélez, Carolina Troya, and José Avellán were each sentenced to two years, two months, and 20 days of imprisonment.
Fuel diversion scheme
The Triple A case centers on an illegal network that diverted state-subsidized fuel into unauthorized commercial segments. According to the prosecution brought by the Attorney General's Office, the network carried out the illicit diversion through operations known as el cambiazo, or the swap.
Prosecutors had previously requested a sentence of six years and nine months in prison for the defendants accused as direct authors. The prosecution also asked the court to order economic fines and a comprehensive reparation payment of $61.5 million to cover damage caused to the state.
In setting economic sanctions, the tribunal initially fixed a fine equivalent to 12 unified basic salaries for each direct author. The unified basic salary serves as Ecuador's standard national benchmark for legal fines and statutory penalties.
Court proceedings
Fuel subsidies in Ecuador are designed to reduce energy costs for specific authorized sectors, making the illegal marketing and diversion of petroleum products a serious offense under national law.
The reading of the sentence was continuing as the tribunal worked to conclude detailing its decision. The court must still complete its full presentation regarding all processed individuals and state the remaining legal consequences established in the judgment.
