51 Winter 2025 n July 18, 1994, a bomb destroyed the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA) headquarters in the Barrio de Once of Buenos Aires. This attack, which claimed the lives of 85 people and injured more than 300, was one of the most devastating terrorist massacres in Argentina, and one of the worst in Latin American history. Since 2024, the National Judiciary of Argentina has issued several rulings, resolutions and initiatives related to the tragic event of July 18, 1994. During Dr. Mariano Hernán Borinsky’s [a co-author of this paper] tenure as President of the Federal Criminal Cassation Court, Chamber II of the abovementioned Court issued a ruling on April 11, 2024, regarding what is commonly termed the “AMIA case.” The Court delivered two key rulings in relation to this case on the same day. The first determined that the attacks constituted serious “violations of human rights,”1 and classified the crimes as imprescriptible. As a result, victims and their families received the option of pursuing legal proceedings without concern that a statute of limitations would bar future actions. Additionally, the Court upheld previous convictions of former officials and other individuals involved in orchestrating the AMIA bombing. The crimes for which the convicted individuals were held responsible included embezzlement, malfeasance, aggravated illegal detention, concealment, and evidence tampering. In the second ruling,2 Chamber II of the Federal Criminal Cassation Court analyzed the acquittal of Carlos Telleldín, who had been accused of providing the vehicle used in the bombing. During the review of Telleldín’s case, the case of the Iranian suspects linked to the bombing was reviewed in absentia, as the Iranian suspects never appeared before the Court. In a vote led by the presiding judge, the Chamber determined that on March 17, 1992, a device exploded at the Israeli embassy, leaving 22 dead and over 350 injured. The Supreme Court received authority to investigate the case due to its original jurisdiction, and on December 23, 1999, the Court concluded that the attack had been carried out with a car bomb. The Court also determined that the attack was organized and executed by the terrorist group known as “Islamic Jihad,” which was the armed wing of “Hezbollah.” Consequently, international arrest warrants were issued for members of the organization. The ruling3 of the Federal Criminal Cassation Court pointed out that two years after the attack against the Israeli embassy, Argentina was once again the target of Islamist terrorism. As before, the targets were institutions of the Jewish community. The Court conveyed that the prosecutor's submissions thoroughly examined the international connections to the AMIA bombing, and that the prosecutors had requested several arrest warrants against Iranian officials. This reflected an understanding that, even at the early stages of the investigation, prosecutors understood that the Islamic Republic of Iran had both endorsed and helped coordinate the attack. Furthermore, a report from one of the prosecutorial units indicated that both terrorist attacks “were carried out as a form of political pressure and extortion for Argentina to comply with contracts for the provision of nuclear material and technology signed with the Islamic Republic of Iran.”4 Both contracts had been unilaterally rescinded shortly before the attacks, and it was later determined by the Court that “There are several and solid references that confirm the connection between both attacks and the responsibility behind them of the terrorist Thirty Years After the AMIA Bombing: Rulings, Resolutions and Initiatives by the Federal Criminal Cassation Court of Argentina Mariano H. Borinsky, Hernán Najenson, Laura F. Kvitko and Nicole Z. Amquie 1. Galeano, Juan José, Case No. 9.789/2000/TO1/CFC3 (Argentina). 2. Telleldín, Carlos Alberto, Case No. CFP 8.566/1996/ TO1/CFC1-CFC3 (Argentina). 3. Id., at 26. 4. Id., at 34. O
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=