WILLEMSTAD - The Supreme Court in The Hague has annulled the verdict from the Court of Appeals dated November 18, 2021, in the expropriation case 'Troya' against the convicted man Jose Luis de Andrade. The case has been sent back to Curaçao for a complete retrial.
In the case of Rosaura Asuaje, the verdict remains standing. The Dutch authorities see no reason to overturn her verdict. The decisions of the Supreme Court align with the conclusions of the Attorney General of the Netherlands. This concerns the case known as the 'Monterrey case' in public, where suspects used Curaçao companies to convert bolivars to dollars through the 'swiping' phenomenon.
In 2021, the Court of Appeals confirmed the verdict of the Court of First Instance dated September 27, 2019, in both cases. In Asuaje's case, it was stipulated that she must pay the amount to be expropriated, which amounts to 509,280.17 guilders. This should be paid, subtracting the sum generated from the sale of one of her properties. Asuaje earned the money by exchanging Venezuelan bolivars into American dollars through 'swiping.' However, she appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that the Court of Appeals had rejected her defense that her statement to the police could not be used to calculate the amount she had received illegally. According to the Supreme Court, this reason does not result in a successful appeal. The Dutch authorities have no need to motivate this decision. In other words, Asuaje must pay the sum.
In De Andrade's case, the amount was set at 4,491,130.57 guilders, with the condition that if he does not pay the sum, he will have to serve an additional 3 years in prison for what he has already received for the crimes he committed. In his case, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands found that the Court of Appeals in the Caribbean had made an error. De Andrade objected to the court's consideration that he had gained the money illegally based on three proven crimes, while the period in which he committed these crimes was shorter than the period during which he received the money. The Supreme Court agrees with this and demonstrates this in all that the Attorney General had stated in his conclusion under points 8 to 12.
According to the Attorney General, De Andrade was convicted of various crimes, including money laundering, and at the same time, the court also ruled in the expropriation case, at the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office (OM). According to the court, from 2011 to 2015, he received a commission of 4,985,778.14 dollars as an agent for a company, converting Venezuelan bolivars into dollars through the 'swipe' phenomenon, or 'dollar tourism,' at a much higher value.
De Andrade appealed the verdict. His lawyer argued that the expropriation sentence could not stand because De Andrade's income did not increase due to the money laundering crimes for which he was convicted. The court rejected this argument and affirmed that the proven money laundering actions could be considered determinative crimes for which he laundered the proceeds. The calculated sum received as illegal profit was based on the amount stipulated in the criminal case, which De Andrade had laundered from 2011 to 2015. The court determined that he generated an income of 142,450,804 dollars through money laundering crimes.
However, the established time in the criminal case covers a shorter period. Despite this, the court maintained its decision that De Andrade had illegally earned money, such as by buying a house, for example. Nevertheless, the discrepancy between the time period during which the money laundering took place and the period considered for confiscation was the reason why the Court of Appeals did not sufficiently motivate why it rejected De Andrade's defense argument. Therefore, the Appeals Court overturned the verdict and sent the case back for a completely new treatment to reach a new and well-motivated decision.
