Cuban Minister of Justice Oscar Silvera noted on Thursday that CRF I Limited is not, nor has it been a creditor of his country, after the conclusion of the lawsuit filed against the National Bank and the Caribbean country.
The minister pointed out that CRF I Limited (a vulture fund) tried to appropriate Cuba’s debt through illegal acts and evidence was shown in this regard during the trial in the High Court of England.
Silvera explained that there is evidence “that shows that at a time as delicate as the passage of Hurricane Irma, they tried to put pressure on Cuba and establish this legal claim.”
He added that after an “alleged unfavorable ruling” the vulture fund would try to prevent the free flow of funds to and from Cuba to block the country’s access to international financial markets effectively, according to the Granma newspaper.
The minister of Justice stressed that CFR I Limited has tried to discredit Cuba using a judicial proceeding as a basis, which “as has been said is of a commercial nature.”
They lie and cheat because they are not right, he stressed. If they were right, they were objective, he pointed out.
The minister of Justice informed that some of the representatives of CFR I Limited violated the rules of the court with illegal behaviors that were notified to the police by the British Court and an investigation into the facts is currently underway.
“Even, bypassing the rules of freedom of expression, they have emphasized attacking, threatening, defaming and harassing our lawyers and the Cuban delegation present here in London,” he stressed.
He explained that the Cuban legal team is made up of the legal services of a top-level international law firm in Latin America, which coordinates the actions through the barristers and solicitors required by English law.
At the same time, he noted that Cuba’s defenders have full support and confidence and have shown their professionalism, ethics and legal rigor during the process.
Silvera highlighted the seriousness, adherence to the rules and organization of protocols of a technological nature by the British court and its authorities in each part of the process, in which several witnesses from Cuba have testified in real time.
He pointed out that after the presentation of evidence, legal arguments and final statements by the lawyers of the parties before the Judge has been concluded, it is up to the Court to issue a sentence that will be produced according to the flow of matters that are settled in Court.
“The practice of this body is that the sentence is not handed down immediately,” he added. (PL)
Minister of Justice Silvera is mostly correct despite his polarizing comments, but he’s not entirely accurate on all comments. For example, while Justice Cockerill did indeed refer the illegal out-of-court behavior to authorities, they were not members of the plaintiff CRF. So I object to trashing CFR on this overstated issue, please read the court transcripts.
How I do as a matter of fact support trashing CRF is in another highly understated issue in which the Minister did not say enough. Minister Silvera is quoted as saying, “…CFR I Limited has tried to discredit Cuba using a judicial proceeding…”, this is an understatement. Fact is, CRF applied for and was refused permission by the English court to adduce expert evidence to question the independence and fairness of the Cuban judicial system. This is amazing in itself. But also a huge win for Cuba’s judicial system which the Minister represents.
Furthermore, notwithstanding the plaintiff’s lead attorney, as well as, his dishonest expert witness questioning Cuba’s judicial system anyway despite the English court refusal to do so, it was the defense expert witness who nailed the CFR coffin with respect to the legal system when professor Mendoza’s cross examination clearly described the intricate and well structured judiciary system in Cuba. His testimony gave the world transparency into the legal system with respect to foreign debt laws. Well done indeed professor.
Having just trashed CRF, it must be said to their credit that i highly agree on one and only one of their issues, or as such issue was phrased by the defense: their “sales pitch”. I absolutely agree 100% with high emphasis and do so by screaming it at the top of my lungs that whether the restructuring of the debt be by CRF strong-arm or by the Paris Club or any other good or bad creditor, any restructuring instrument that puts Cuba in the performing (out-of-default) borrower category is good for its 11 million inhabitants.
Henry DelForn,
private investor.
PS – the case is a no-brainer in favor of Cuba.