Can Cristina Kirchner go out onto the balcony? Can she request domestic staff? And will her private secretaries stop working for her? Can she give press interviews? These are some of the most frequently asked questions surrounding the decision by the Second Federal Oral Court (TOF 2), which ordered the former vice president to serve her sentence for corruption in the Highways case at home, which has rules for compliance.
Every three months, the TOF 2, composed of Jorge Gorini, Rodrigo Giménez Uriburu and Andrés Basso, will receive a report from the Directorate of Control and Assistance in the Execution of Criminal Sentences, which oversees the execution of Cristina Kirchner's house arrest.
The rules imposed include restrictions on who can visit her. A list of relatives, doctors, lawyers, and guardians was required. Those not included in these categories will require court authorization.
The details requested by the judges are limited and left out a group of people who have surrounded Cristina Kirchner for decades: her private secretaries.
If the former vice president intends to continue the work of her secretaries, she will have to ask the judges for authorization, without losing sight of one key fact: She will no longer be able to keep any agenda outside her home.
The former head of state, accused of committing acts of corruption while head of the National Executive Branch, causing damage to the State of 85 billion pesos, is being held at home and must serve a six-year sentence there. Only when she has served two-thirds of that sentence—in four years—will she be able to apply for parole.
What if Cristina Kirchner wants to hire domestic help? She lives alone in the 160-square-meter apartment, according to her socio-environmental interview, but if she needs help with maintenance, she will also have to ask the court for permission.
Why did the Second Federal Court grant Cristina a reduced sentence? Essentially, it's due to a security issue, which should be the priority in all authorizations issued by the Court regarding visits. The measure will be monitored by an electronic device.
The electronic anklet was requested by prosecutors Diego Luciani and Sergio Mola, something the Court took into consideration. However, the court also stated that the measure was adopted because"no health reasons were established to justify an exceptional decision on this matter."
The judges said that "the combination of the risk to the life and physical integrity of the convicted person as a result of the attack of which she was the victim, together with the difficulty of guaranteeing her safety in a penitentiary establishment without engaging in practices that are inconsistent with constitutional and conventional law - isolation - lead to the decision in favor of granting house arrest as the only way currently compatible with respect for the fundamental rights of the person and the resocializing purposes of the sentence."
