ARGENTINA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Aranzazú Sesma Lasierra, Roberto Durrieu and Tomás Guido, Estudio Durrieu
On the one hand, one could argue that, since Decree No 274/2025 does not differentiate between past and future cases, its effect should apply to all ongoing cas - es, and therefore retroactively. This raises the issue of a potential lack of standing to sue. Indeed, it is agreed that legal capacity is a requirement for the admissibil - ity of criminal proceedings, but it can also be argued that this capacity should be maintained throughout the entire trial. According to Decree No 274/2025, the UIF would no longer have legal capacity, since it is no longer entitled to act as a party in the court proceedings. This interpretation signifies that the cases have been brought by an illegitimate party ‒ the UIF ‒ and should be dismissed. The Tribunal Oral en lo Penal Económico of the City of Buenos Aires (Oral Criminal Court for Financial Crimes) has ruled in this regard, arguing that, if the UIF is not removed from its role as querellante , it would violate the principle of equality in proceedings in which the UIF is currently acting as prosecutor. The defendants would face an additional prosecutor, unlike in cases initiated after the issuance of the Decree. This raises the question of the equality of arms in criminal pro - ceedings, with the defendants having to counter argu - ments from the Ministry of Justice, the UIF and, in some cases, the civil parties as well. In support of this position, the Federal Court of Cas - sation, Chamber I, ruled on 30 May 2025 that the UIF lacks the authority to bring charges in such proceed - ings, as this provision is strictly procedural in nature and therefore fully applicable. Consequently, as the UIF does not have the status of a plaintiff, it lacks the legal capacity to act in ongoing proceedings. On the other hand, Decree No 274/2025 could also be interpreted as meaning that the UIF can no longer act as querellante in future cases but that it will main - tain its status in ongoing proceedings, until they are concluded. This interpretation would help to maintain some legal certainty and allow the UIF to close all the cases it has been investigating, in some instances for many years. The UIF has argued for a non-retroac - tive effect of the Decree, a position which has been approved by some judges.
In resolution No 33/2025 of 23 May 2025, the Fed - eral Oral Court of Concepción del Uruguay held that there is no provision mandating the removal of the UIF in criminal proceedings in which it is already con - stituted as a plaintiff. Excluding the UIF at that stage of the proceedings would therefore imply extending the effects of Decree No 274/2025 beyond what is established in the text of the regulation. On 19 June 2025, the National Chamber of Appeals in Economic Criminal Matters, Chamber A,CPE 1002/2016, also stated that, as the UIF’s authorisa - tion to bring charges has been revoked, it can only be concluded that the UIF is barred from intervening as a plaintiff from the indicated date onwards. How - ever, this does not mean that the UIF’s role should be restricted or rendered ineffective in prior cases. On the contrary, if the Executive Branch had intended such a retroactive effect, it would have expressly provided for this. Conclusion As highlighted in this article, the role FIUs play around the world is key to combating corruption, ML, TF and PWMD. In this sense, Argentina’s adoption of Decree No 274/2025, in response to the FATF Mutual Evalua - tion of 2024, marks a significant shift in the role played by its FIU, the UIF. While the UIF will maintain its key role in combating financial crime, its functions are now more closely aligned with those of other FIUs around the world. While governments usually reserve prosecutorial pow - ers for the judicial or law enforcement authorities, the UIF in Argentina has differentiated itself from the rest of the FATF member countries by acting as a plaintiff in many cases, despite being an independent body. The removal of its ability to act as a querellante was necessary to prevent any conflict with its independ - ence and to ensure Argentina’s compliance with inter - national standards. However, this change has raised questions which will undoubtedly engage Argentinian judges in the coming months. The Decree’s lack of clarity, especially regarding its retroactive effect, has created uncertainty in ongoing legal proceedings. Diverging court rulings reflect a tension between the principles of procedural fairness,
13 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook