PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR FOR THE DISTRICT OF SUCUMBÍOS I ... · Page 3 of 19 [initials] CERT. MERRILL VER: JD . The following is a nonexhaustive list of the different crimes GUERRA

Page 1 of 19 [initials] CERT. MERRILL VER: JD

PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR FOR THE DISTRICT OF SUCUMBÍOS

I, Pablo Fajardo Mendoza, Ecuadorian, 40 years of age, marital status divorced, attorney, with

Attorney’s Forum registration number 21-2004-01, Identity Card No. 0801427733, a resident of

the city of Nueva Loja; and Humberto Piaguaje Lucitante, holder of Identity Card No.

1500281579, 48 years old, a resident of this city of Nueva Loja, province of Sucumbíos, appear

before you with the COMPLAINT that is summarized below:

On November 17, 2012, the dismissed judge of the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos,

ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS, gave an affidavit before a notary public in Chicago,

United States (EXHIBIT 1). The affidavit that former Judge GUERRA gave concerns

case No.002-2003 (Aguinda et al. v. Chevron Corp.) pursued before the Office of the

President of the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos, and it contains a series of false and

defamatory statements that attack the honor not only of several Ecuadorian citizens, but

also constitute an offense against the judiciary. For these acts, Chevron Corp. paid

dismissed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS more than $326,000, plus other benefits that

included his transportation and stay in the U.S. with all the expenses paid. To avoid

justice, GUERRA BASTIDAS fled from Ecuador in mid January 2013, where he enjoys

the ill-gotten money and other benefits provided by Chevron Corp.

On the following pages I set forth the factual grounds and evidence, the foundations of law and

the actions we propose be conducted to investigate, prosecute and sanction the different crimes

committed by dismissed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS.

Background

As is public knowledge, between 1964 and 1990 Chevron (formerly Texaco) was operator of a

consortium that caused a serious environmental and human disaster in northeastern Ecuador.

Plaintiff's Exhibit 1758 p. 1 of 3911 Civ. 0691 (LAK)

PLAINTIFF’SEXHIBIT1758


As a result of the damage caused, in 1993 the affected indigenous and peasant communities filed

a lawsuit against the company in New York courts. For almost 10 years the oil company fought

to have the U.S. courts dismiss the case and transfer it to Ecuador, arguing that Ecuador was the

proper forum to hear the case. After succeeding and agreeing to submit to Ecuadorian

jurisdiction, the case was transferred to Ecuador in March 2003, when a lawsuit for

environmental damage was filed against Chevron-Texaco with the Office of the President of the

Provincial Court of Sucumbíos (Case No. 002-2003). After 56 judicial inspections, 118 expert

reports, nearly 64,000 lab test results and roughly 215,000 pages of case record, on February 14,

2011, the President of the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos, Nicolás Zambrano, issued a 188-page

judgment against Chevron Corp. This judgment was affirmed on appeal on January 3, 2012, and

the case is currently on appeal for cassation before the National Court.

More than a dozen judges have heard this case. At trial alone six different judges presided over

the case, the first judge being the then President of the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos,

ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS, who publicly showed his pride—to all the media—at being

the judge responsible for admitting the complaint that led to the famous lawsuit. GUERRA

BASTIDAS heard the case between May and December 2003.

This background serves as context for the affidavit signed by GUERRA BASTIDAS, after he

was removed from office as judge for having repeatedly and publicly stated that that he would

annul “the environmental remediation cases, mainly against CHEVRON -TEXACO.”1

1 In a decision issued May 29, 2008, at 11:30 a.m., the Human Resources Commission of the Judicial Council dismissed GUERRA BASTIDAS finding “that the Judge under investigation has committed serious misconduct, having given his opinion about a case that is still pending and that he had already presided over when he was President of the Superior Court of Justice of Nueva Loja, and that he necessarily would have to hear again” and “that these actions affect the image of the judiciary and the legal certainty of court users.” And the case to which the dismissed judge referred was precisely the one we are pursuing against Chevron Corporation.

Plaintiff's Exhibit 1758 p. 2 of 39


The following is a non-exhaustive list of the different crimes GUERRA BASTIDAS committed

when he decided to give a defamatory and perjurious affidavit, with the aggravating

circumstance that he received enormous financial benefits from Chevron Corp. itself.

The several crimes committed by ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS:

On November 17, 2012, dismissed Judge of the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos ALBERTO

GUERRA BASTIDAS, in exchange for receiving extraordinary payments totaling more than

$326,000 from Chevron Corp.2, gave an affidavit (“The Affidavit”) before a notary public in

Chicago, United States (EXHIBIT 1), that not only is not true, but slanders the good name and

reputation of those who sign this complaint, the plaintiffs in the case against Chevron, and more

importantly, ends up undermining the entire judiciary.

We will see that The Affidavit given by dismissed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS contains a series

of false assertions, and contains offenses and slanders against the Ecuadorian judicial system,

against the plaintiffs in the Chevron case, and against their attorneys and representatives. To

these statements can be added a series of equally defamatory circumstances (statements of paid

witnesses, paid advertisements in the media, paid advertisements on the Internet, etc.), always

financed by Chevron Corp.3 The undersigned expressly denounce that by means of his—

2 For the services provided, Chevron Corp. has publicly admitted that it provided Guerra, and four members of his family, the possibility of living “the American dream,” with all expenses paid, in an amount not less than $326,000. SEE, press release issued by Chevron on January 28, 2013. 3 These statements are not an isolated incident. It is public knowledge that on August 31, 2009, Chevron disclosed a series of videos that supposedly proved that the presiding judge at that time (Juan Nuñez), the plaintiffs and the President of Ecuador were involved in acts of corruption. When the oil company disclosed the videos, it said that they were made by supposed businessmen in the remediation business. However, subsequent investigations showed that these were made by a drug-trafficking convict, Wayne Hansen, and a long-time Chevron Corp. contractor, Diego Borja. The



well compensated—statements, given under oath, ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS has at least

committed the criminal offenses defined in Articles 128, 285, 295, 354 and 489 of the Criminal

Code:

Below we will explain how the definition of each of these crimes is met, crimes that dismissed

Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS committed when he decided to give the false and defamatory

Affidavit, in exchange for financial benefits.

l. Perjury committed by GUERRA BASTIDAS

Article 354 of the Criminal Code states with total clarity that false testimony is punishable if the

declarant, whether a private citizen or an authority, declares, testifies, or reports to public

authorities knowing that the testimony is not true; and perjury is when the testimony is given

under oath. (... ) In The Affidavit, dismissed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS knowingly denies the

tuth on numerous occasions — each of them equally punishable. The following are some

examples of perjury GUERRA BASTIDAS committed in The Affidavit:

investigation also revealed that there was no act of corruption and that the video was filmed for the sole purpose of discrediting the Ecuadorian courts and negatively affecting the case pursued by the northeastern communities. In a private conversation disclosed later, Borja boasts of having done in “three days?, two days?” what the oil company had not been able to do in several months—get Judge Nuñez removed from the case. For their help concocting a deceit, Hansen and Borja, the people who filmed the video, were generously compensated by Chevron. Diego Borja and his family were moved to the United States. Despite not working for the oil company, since his departure from Ecuador, Borja has received a monthly allowance of between $5,000 and $10,000. And all of his expenses are covered by the oil company. Chevron covers the following expenses, among others: vehicles, security guards, taxes and a fully furnished house, with pool, in a closed community that borders a golf course and rents for $6,000 a month. Borja’s wife, Sara Portilla, has also been hired by Chevron and receives a monthly salary. In the case of Wayne Hansen, it is known that he lived a luxurious life in Peru, to where he fled from the United States shortly after he was called to testify regarding the secret filming of Judge Nuñez. The last he was heard from, he was living comfortably in Mancora, a coastal town in northern Peru, in a three-bedroom house with a pool and maid and cook service, paid for by Chevron Corp.



1. It is false that GUERRA BASTIDAS was pressured to admit the environmental

damage case against Chevron Corp., and it is false that GUERRA BASTIDAS

acted out of “fear.”

Several facts and public documents show that the compensated affidavit of dismissed Judge

GUERRA BASTIDAS, in which he says he doubted the validity of the plaintiffs’ claims and he

agreed to admit the case out of fear or pressures is false and slanderous.

So if we analyze the statements GUERRA BASTIDAS made in the past (when he was Judge)

and we compare them with his recent statements, in the well-compensated affidavit, we note that

his own comments about several aspects of the case are diametrically opposed. For example, in

the affidavit given in exchange for financial compensation, dismissed Judge GUERRA

BASTIDAS asserts that:

“ At the beginning of the case I doubted the validity of the Plaintiffs’ claims, but due to

public pressure brought to bear by the representatives of the Plaintiffs during the first

hearing in the case, I allowed the case to continue because I felt that if I didn’t, my

personal safety would be at risk.”

But if we review assertions GUERRA BASTIDAS made to several media outlets, we see the

same GUERRA BASTIDAS, then acting as judge, was proud of his work and believed the

plaintiffs’ suit had to be admitted to trial, even going so far as to state that the case was the same

as any other and that he received no pressure to move forward with the proceeding.



In the article entitled “Judge Guerra: Ecuadorian courts have jurisdiction”4 published in

October 20, 2003, in el Universo newspaper, when Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS was

asked if a trial against a multinational (Chevron Corp.) carried more responsibility, he

answered that “enough responsibility—the same as [the case] of any Ecuadorian citizen

requires.” (See Exhibit 2)

The same article also says: “The President of the Superior Court of Justice of Nueva

Loja, Alberto Guerra Bastidas, believes that the environmental damage suit that 47

indigenous and peasant representatives of Orellana and Sucumbíos filed against Chevron

Texaco is an opportunity to show that the Ecuadorian courts operate with rectitude and

honesty.”

In the same article GUERRA BASTIDAS recognized the integrity of the Ecuadorian

judiciary and declared that he is not willing to bow to any type of pressure. Asked if the

lawsuit filed by the communities would be handled transparently and properly, GUERRA

BASTIDAS answered that “no person, institution or state should worry.”

Similar statements GUERRA BASTIDAS made appear in another article entitled “Transparency

discrepancies in the case,” published in el Universo on October 21, 2003,5 (see Exhibit 3). This

article also contains Judge Guerra’s statement:

“No person, institution or State, should question the integrity of the Ecuadorian judges,”

which he said in response to the request made by church representatives

4 http://www.eluniverso.com/2003/10/20/0001/12/0963562EFD6F4E3DB13CEOF7407EC3EE.html 5 Press release published in El Universo newspaper, October 21, 2003. http://www.eluniverso.com/2003/10/21/0D01/12/F976BF1CF3174C608CBC7EDAC4877B40.html


http://www.eluniverso.com/2003/10/20/0001/12/0963562EFD6F4E3DB13CEOF7407EC3EE.html

http://www.eluniverso.com/2003/10/21/0D01/12/F976BF1CF3174C608CBC7EDAC4877B40.html


and environmentalists that the case be transparent and that [the court] not yield to the

company’s economic might.

The article “Two marches will be held to support the hearing in the case against Chevron-

Texaco,” published in El Comercio on October 21, 2003, also contains statements that show that

then Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS did not act under pressure when hearing the case filed by the

Amazon communities. In this article, GUERRA BASTIDAS freely and voluntarily makes the

following statement:

“I want to dignify the Ecuadorian justice system, complying with what the law requires.”

Even after GUERRA BASTIDAS had already been removed from office as judge, he freely and

voluntarily made several public statements. These statements are very important because they

were made to the press, without the supposed “pressure” of being the judge presiding over the

case. In the article published in el Universo on October 18, 2009, entitled: “Former Judge

requests investigation of allegations in lawsuit,”6 GUERRA BASTIDAS states:

“that at that time there were no internal or external pressures. However, he recalls a

telephone call he received in October 2003 -he says- from the then Attorney General,

Jose Maria Borja. ‘He rebuked me. He said that the Ecuadorian State has to answer and

told me that after the hearing I should request the case record to issue a judgment

dismissing the claim, without opening an evidentiary phase. I could have done it, but I

decided to move forward (…).’”

6 Press release published in el Universo newspaper, October 18, 2009. http://www.eluniverso.com/2009/10/18/1/1356/ex-juez-pide-indaquen-denunciasproceso-html?p=1354&m=1775



This statement by GUERRA BASTIDAS not only shows that he received no pressure from the

plaintiffs to admit the lawsuit, as he falsely states under oath in his recent compensated affidavit,

but rather he was pressured by the government to rule in favor of Chevron Corp. GUERRA

BASTIDAS, however, then upheld the law and enforced the judiciary’s independence.

This shows that GUERRA BASTIDAS committed perjury by lying under oath (for financial

compensation) when he said that he acted under pressure or out of fear when he admitted the

environmental damage case against Chevron Corp.

2. It is false that there was an agreement between GUERRA BASTIDAS and

plaintiffs in case No. 002-2003.

In response to this statement by GUERRA BASTIDAS in exchange for financial compensation,

one should note that the dismissed judge does not present a single piece of evidence or proof of

the truth of his claim. If such an agreement did exist, then GUERRA BASTIDAS should be able

to present documentary evidence of it, since such an agreement supposedly involved him

personally, so he should have receipts, deposit slips, written communication, digital files, or

some other means of at least proving his participation in the fictitious agreement.

Since this statement also constitutes the crime of defamation, below we will explain further.

3. It is false that there was an agreement between the plaintiffs and Judge Nicolás

Zambrano

Just like with GUERRA BASTIDAS’s statement that there was an agreement between himself

and the plaintiffs, the dismissed judge does not contribute a single piece of evidence supporting

his statements regarding a different supposed agreement between the plaintiffs and Judge

Zambrano, even though the circumstances



he discusses involve serious accusations that border on serious defamation imputing the

commission of a crime, as we will also see later.

4. It is false that GUERRA BASTIDAS did not receive money or compensation from

Chevron.

In his affidavit GUERRA BASTIDAS states that he has not received any money or

compensation in exchange for signing the affidavit, as he states under oath, and also that he has

not been offered any.7

But Chevron Corp. has publicly declared that it made an agreement with Dr. Guerra to pay him

$10,000 a month, plus $2,000 for housing, medical insurance and legal expenses. The full

agreement is for two years.8 (See Exhibit 5)

The fact that he lies about the reasons that led him to give The Affidavit and that he hides the

existence of financial compensation not only invalidates The Affidavit itself, but it also

constitutes an aggravating factor for perjury.

Comments on the multiple cases of perjury GUERRA BASTIDAS committed and the

aggravating factors. As is clear, GUERRA BASTIDAS’s Affidavit is riddled from start to

finish with false statements that do not correspond to the facts but rather have been fabricated to

suit Chevron Corp., in exchange for generous financial compensation and other incentives The

Affidavit is in fact a well-compensated fictitious story, that relies on facts and “evidence”

fabricated and/or taken out of context to fit the needs of the interested party.

7 See page 1 of GUERRA BASTIDAS affidavit: “I have not requested nor have I received any money or any compensation in exchange for signing this sworn declaration. Further, I have not been offered any compensation, present or future, in exchange for signing this sworn declaration ” 8 Press release officially published by Chevron on January 28, 2013. Shortly after Chevron published this press release, the company took it down and published another press release in its place that omitted the paragraph in which the company admitted it had made an agreement with Guerra Bastidas. The original press release is in English, but translated into Spanish it reads: “In an interview, Chevron spokesman Kent Robertson acknowledges also that Chevron has made a two-year commitment to pay Guerra's family a total of $10,000 per month for living expenses and $2,000 per month for housing, plus health insurance and legal fees.”



So as one reviews GUERRA BASTIDAS’s statements, questions necessarily arise, such as:

• How come Chevron’s attorneys, always ready to recuse a judge, even for insignificant

reasons, did not file a complaint or request for recusal against Judge Zambrano, when

GUERRA BASTIDAS approached them to make the offer that Zambrano would rule in

their favor in exchange for money? Or

• If GUERRA BASTIDAS was involved in drafting the judgment, why is there no proof

(not even taken out of context) that connects Guerra to Zambrano or to the plaintiffs in

2011 when it was written?

• If the plaintiffs supposedly had a relationship with Zambrano, why would they need

GUERRA BASTIDAS (who had already been dismissed as judge of the Sucumbíos

Court for making public statements that he would annul the case against Chevron)?

• Why does GUERRA BASTIDAS state that he started to help Zambrano draft court

documents because he was facing financial difficulties, but his bank statements (attached

as Exhibits to his affidavit) show that he had at least $16,000 and his resume shows he

was working?

• Why has GUERRA BASTIDAS changed his opinion so radically between the start of the

suit and the present? How much did The Affidavit really cost Chevron Corp.?

• Was The Affidavit written by GUERRA BASTIDAS or by Chevron’s American

attorneys? Why does the supposedly original affidavit in Spanish use Anglicisms, such as

the word “moción” (from the English word “motion”), which is rarely used in the

Ecuadorian legal system? [Trans. – The word “escrito” is typically used in Spanish to

mean “motion.”]

In short, there are an endless number of questions whose only possible answer is that the

statements GUERRA BASTIDAS made in his affidavit are false, that GUERRA



BASTIDAS knows his statements are false, and that he made them because Chevron paid him to

serve its own interest.

II. GUERRA BASTIDAS’s defamation

According to Art. 489 of the Criminal Code, [there are two kinds of] defamation: falsely

accusing a person of a crime; and any other expression that discredits, dishonors, or disparages

another person, or any action performed for that purpose. As we shall see, the statements that

GUERRA BASTIDAS was generously paid to make defame several people, accusing them of

committing multiple crimes and discrediting their honor and reputation.

1. Defamation of the plaintiffs not imputing commission of a crime.

Removed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS defamed Maria Aguinda, all of the plaintiffs in

case No. 002-2003 against Chevron, and all of those harmed by the environmental

damage, and all of the people who attended the conciliation hearing, when he said that he

admitted the case because he felt that his life would be in danger if he did not do so.9

Since we already discussed the statements GUERRA BASTIDAS made publicly to

several media outlets when he was judge, we will not unnecessarily lengthen this

complaint by citing them again. Rather, we direct your attention to the contradictions

between them and the discredit implied by GUERRA BASTIDAS’s comments that he

acted out of fear of the plaintiffs, as if they were thugs or “dangerous people,” capable of

endangering his “personal safety.”

9 See The Affidavit, pg. 1: “ (…)At the beginning of the case I doubted the validity of the Plaintiffs’ claims, but due to public pressure brought to bear by the representatives of the Plaintiffs during the first hearing in the case, I allowed the case to continue because I felt that if I didn’t, my personal safety would be at risk.”



Therefore, by stating that he feared for his safety, GUERRA BASTIDAS implies that his

fear was based on a threat the plaintiffs posed to his safety. This unjustified discrediting

of the plaintiffs and their representatives constitutes a punishable offense—defamation.

2. Defamation imputing commission of a crime to the plaintiffs’ attorneys and/or representatives

We believe that in The Affidavit GUERRA BASTIDAS falsely imputes the commission

of at least three crimes to the plaintiffs’ attorneys and representatives, either jointly or

separately, and to Judge Zambrano.

1. The first defamation imputing commission of a crime made by GUERRA

BASTIDAS consists of stating that the plaintiffs’ representatives in case No. 002-

2003 drafted the judgment issued on February 14, 2011.10 By making this

statement, GUERRA BASTIDAS is falsely imputing to the plaintiffs’

representatives the crime defined in Art. 339 of the CRIMINAL CODE:

Any other person who commits a falsehood in a public document,

commercial or bank instrument, agricultural or industrial collateral

agreement or special commerce collateral agreement, in a pleading or in

any other judicial act, will be punished with six to nine years of

imprisonment:

For false signature;

For imitating or altering letters or signatures;

For fabricating agreements, provisions, obligations or discharges,

or for having untimely inserted them in documents; or

For adding or altering clauses, declarations or facts that the

document was intended to receive or confirm.

10 See The Affidavit, pg. 6: “The proposal entailed Plaintiffs writing a draft of the judgment and Judge Zambrano signing it and issuing it as his own” and “it was through (Judge Zambrano) that I found out that the attorneys for the Plaintiffs had written that judgment and had delivered it to him.”



Given that none of the plaintiffs, or their representatives or attorneys have been convicted

of this crime (or even accused of it), GUERRA BASTIDAS has committed defamation

imputing commission of a crime against us.

2. Next, although this imputation of a crime is related to the previous one, GUERRA

BASTIDAS makes a separate statement regarding the plaintiffs’ attorneys and

representatives having bribed Judge Zambrano to issue the judgment as his own.

In this case, GUERRA BASTIDAS is imputing to the plaintiffs’ attorneys and

representatives the crime established in Art. 359 of the CRIMINAL CODE:

Anyone who bribes a witness, expert or interpreter, or who knowingly uses false

witnesses or experts in a court proceeding, whether in that person’s own case or

for their client, will be punished as guilty of false testimony or perjury, as the case

may be.

At the same time, GUERRA BASTIDAS is imputing to Judge Zambrano the crime

defined in Art. 337 of the CRIMINAL CODE.

Public officials who, in the exercise of their duties, commit one of the following

falsehoods will be punished by imprisonment from nine to twelve years:

False signature;

Alteration of certified records, notary instruments, or signatures;

Assumption of identity;



Notary instruments made or added to registries or other public documents

or motions or other court documents, after they have been created or

closed.

Given that none of the plaintiffs, or their representatives or attorneys, or Judge Zambrano,

have been convicted of this crime (or even accused of it), GUERRA BASTIDAS has

defamed them.

3. The third false imputation of a crime GUERRA BASTIDAS made was stating that

between October 2009 and February 2010, while Zambrano heard the case against

Chevron Corp., there was an agreement between the plaintiffs and Zambrano and

GUERRA BASTIDAS himself to issue decisions in favor of the plaintiffs. This

accusation also imputes a crime to both Judge Zambrano and the plaintiffs’ attorneys

and representatives. In this case, Articles 337 and 359 of the Criminal Code also

apply, being the crimes that GUERRA BASTIDAS falsely imputes to the plaintiffs,

their attorneys and representatives, and Judge Zambrano.

Given that none of the plaintiffs, or their representatives or attorneys, or Judge

Zambrano have been convicted of this crime (or even accused of it), GUERRA

BASTIDAS has made a defamatory statement imputing commission of a crime

against them.

III. Offenses against public institutions committed by GUERRA BASTIDAS

The Affidavit GUERRA ZAMBRANO [sic] gave contains statements that constitute true

offenses against the court system and against the entire State of Ecuador. These statements are

punishable under Art. 128 of the CRIMINAL CODE:



Anyone who publicly, and in cases other than those established in this Code,

incites or foments separatism by any means, or offends or vilifies public

institutions or law enforcement agencies, commits any ridicule or contempt,

through words or actions, against the Flag, the Seal or the Anthem of the Nation,

will be punished with imprisonment of from six months to three years and a fine of

from $44 to $87.

The entire Affidavit offends the majesty of the court system by describing multiple illegalities

supposedly committed by the judges responsible for administering justice. Given that there is no

evidence whatsoever of these supposed irregularities, the offense suffered by the judiciary of

Ecuador is absolutely unjustified, and aside from being false, these statements constitute the

punishable crime of an offense against public institutions.

IV. GUERRA BASTIDAS imputes to himself a crime that has not been committed

In his affidavit, removed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS states that he participated in acts contrary

to Ecuadorian law, many of which constitute defined crimes.11 With these false statements, made

in exchange for payment, removed Judge GUERRA BASTIDAS is in effect imputing to himself

the commission of several crimes that have not occurred. This conduct is defined in Art. 295 of

the CRIMINAL CODE:

Anyone within a proceeding before an investigation judge or the judge hearing

the case, or out of court before judicial authorities or police officers, who

declares that he has committed a crime that has not been committed, or that he

has committed a crime in which

11 See The Affidavit, pg. 7: “I knew at the time, as I know now, that the arrangement in which I participated, whereby I drafted court rulings for Mr. Zambrano steering the case in favor of the Plaintiffs, and was paid by the Plaintiffs’ representatives for that work, was a violation of Ecuadoran law.”



he has not participated, will be punished with imprisonment from three months to

two years.

So by admitting his participation in a crime that has not occurred, and then fleeing overseas to

avoid answering for these supposed crimes, GUERRA BASTIDAS seeks to involve third parties

who are in Ecuador.

V. Guerra Bastidas has received gifts for performing a manifestly unjust act

We have shown that GUERRA BASTIDAS has agreed to receive a package of benefits totaling

over US$ 326,000 in exchange for signing The Affidavit, which supposedly describes events that

occurred while he served as an Ecuadorian judge. Thus, in order to obtain financial gain for

himself, GUERRA BASTIDAS has proceeded to commit multiple instances of perjury and make

several defamatory statements, which makes his actions manifestly unjust.

Article 285, paragraph 2, specifically establishes that those who have accepted offers or

promises, or received gifts for executing a manifestly unjust act will be punished with

imprisonment, so GUERRA BASTIDAS’s acts meet the definition of that crime.

Legal grounds

Based on the above, removed judge ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS is accused of the

following crimes, as defined in the Criminal Code:

• Art. 128. Anyone who publicly, and in cases other than those established in this Code,

incites or foments separatism by any means, or offends or vilifies public institutions or

law enforcement agencies, commits any ridicule or contempt, through words or actions,

against the Flag, the Seal or the Anthem of the Nation, will be punished with

imprisonment of from six months to three years and a fine of from $44 to $87.



• Art. 285. Any public official or any individual responsible for a public service who

accepts an offer or a promise, or receives a gift, to carry out an act involving their

employment or office, even if it is just, but not subject to compensation, will be punished

with imprisonment from between six months and three years, and a fine of $8 to $16, plus

restitution of twice the amount that person received.

If such an individual has accepted offers or promises or received gifts either for

executing a manifestly unjust act in the exercise of his employment or office, or for failing

to execute an act he was required to execute, then he will be punished with imprisonment

of one to five years and a fine of from $6 to $30 and ordered to repay three times the

amount received.

• Art. 295. Anyone within a proceeding before an investigation judge or the judge hearing

the case, or out of court before judicial authorities or police officers, who declares that

he has committed a crime that has not been committed, or that he has committed a crime

in which he has not participated, will be punished with imprisonment from three months

to two years.

• Art. 354. False testimony is punishable if the declarant, whether a private citizen or an

authority, declares, testifies, or reports to public authorities knowing that the testimony is

not true; and perjury is when the testimony is given under oath.

This provision does not apply to cases of confession and formal statement of the accused

at a preliminary appearance at criminal trial or reports of authorities who are subject to

criminal liability.

• Art. 489. [There are two kinds of] defamation: Falsely accusing a person of a crime; and

any other expression that discredits, dishonors, or disparages another person, or any



action performed for that purpose.

Actions to be taken

Based on Art. 195 of the Constitution of Ecuador, the complainants most respectfully request

that the Prosecutor take all necessary actions to clarify the facts denounced here. As part of the

investigation that the Prosecutor should conduct, we suggest the following actions:

− Appointment of a computer expert from the list at the Judicial Council of Sucumbíos; and

if that list does not contain the name of a [suitable] computer expert to perform this

action, the Prosecutor should send an official letter to the Department of Forensic and

Computer Analysis at the Prosecutor General’s Office, asking that office to perform an

expert analysis of the computer on which the former Deputy President of the Court of

Sucumbíos, Nicolás Zambrano, wrote the judgment in the case pursued by the Amazon

communities against Chevron, and instructing the expert to report whether the judgment

was written on that computer, and if it was written on that computer, the expert should

establish the period of time when it was written.

− Before that, an official letter should be sent to the Provincial Director of the Judicial

Council of Sucumbíos asking him to certify in writing which computer or computers

Judge Nicolás Zambrano Lozada used when he served as Provincial Judge. Those

computers should be the subject of the investigation that we are requesting.

− Receive the testimony of the attorneys and officials from Chevron that Alberto Guerra

says in his affidavit that he met with to offer a favorable ruling in exchange for money.

− Investigate whether other bank accounts exist in the name of ALBERTO GUERRA

BASTIDAS, or whether other assets could have been put in his name.



− Take the testimony of Judge Nicolás Zambrano Lozada, so he can respond to all

accusations made by Dr. Alberto Guerra Bastidas.

− Perform all actions necessary to absolutely clarify the different crimes denounced in this

complaint.

Judicial Domicile

Please send any notifications intended for us to judicial mailboxes No. 78 and 45 in the city of

Nueva Loja, Province of Sucumbíos. We also take this opportunity to authorize Dr. Guillermo

Ortiz Vasquez to appear and represent the rights and interests of the undersigned complainants.

The undersigned are available to recognize their signatures on the complaint filed.

[signature] [signature]

Atty. Pablo Fajardo Mendoza Technologist Humberto Piaguaje Lucitante

COMPLAINANT COMPLAINANT

[signature]

Dr. Guillermo Ortiz Vasquez

LIC. 21-1988-2 ATTORNEY’S FORUM

[rectangular filing stamp] PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF SUCUMBÍOS – Received in Nueva Loja today, February 18, 2013 at 3:22 p.m. in ___ copies and 23 pages

attached – I attest – [signature] – CLERK’S OFFICE FOR PROSECUTORS



MERRILL CORPORATION • MerrilJ Communications LLC 225 Varick Street

New York, NY 10014' (212) 620·5600

State of New Yark Estado de Nueva York

County of New York Condado de Nueva York

)

) ) )

ss: a saber:

Certificate of Accuracy Certificado de Exactitud

This is to certify that the attached translation is, to the best of our Imowledge and belief, a true and accurate translation from Spanish into English ofthe attached document. Por el presente certifico que la traducci6n adjunta es, segun mi leal saber y entender, traducci6n fiel y completa del idiol11a espanol al idiol11a ingles del docul11ento adjunto.

Dated: February 25,2013

Fech.a: 25. d.e.feb.r~~ ~e 201/\

~~ Kate Alexander .' Project Manager - Legal Translations Merrill Brink InternationallMerrill Corporation

[fimmdol Kate Alexander Gerente de Proyecto - Traducciones Legales Merrill Brink International/Merrill Corporation

ROBERT J. MAZZA Notary Public, State of New York

- --.----------- ···----No.-UTMA5D579n

Qualified in Kings County Commission Expires April 1 ,2014

Sworn to and signed before Jurado y firmado ante Me, this 25 th day of mi, a los 25 dias del ____ ~F~eb~ru~ar~y~ _____ 20l3

... __ mes_de febrero .de-2013-

QUbhC Notario Publico

[firmado] [sello 1

OFFICES IN MAJOR CITIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD


SENOR FISCAL PROVINCIAL DISTRITAL DE SUCUMBios:

Pablo Fajardo Mendoza, ecuatoriano, de 40 an,?s de edad, de estado civil

divorciado, de profesion abogado, con matricula del foro de abogados numero 21-

2004-01, con cedula de ciudadania No. 0801427733, con residencia en la ciudad

de Nueva Loja, Humberto Piaguaje Lucitante, portador de la cedula de ciudadania

No. 1500281579, de 48 an os de edad, residente en esta ciudad de Nueva Loja,

provincia de Sucumbios, comparecemos ante usted con la DENUNCIA que se

resume a continuacion:

EI dia 17 de noviembre del 2012, el juez destituido de la Corte Provincial de

Sucumbios, ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS, realizo una declaracion /

juramentada ante notario publico en la ciudad de C'hicago, Estados Unidos

(ANEXO 1). La declaracion juramentada que realizo el ex juez GUERRA

esta relacionada con el proceso judicial No.002-2003 (Caso Aguinda y btros

contra Chevron Corp.) seguido ante la Presidencia de' la Corte Provincial de

Sucumbios, y contiene una serie de aseveraciones falsas e injuriosas, que

atentan contra la honra no solo de varios ciudadanos ecuatorianos, sin~ que

ademas constituyen delitos contra la aetividad judicial. Por estos aetos, el

destituido juez GUERRA BASTIDAS fue remuneradi por Chevron Corp.

con mas de 326.000 US$ Y otros beneficios que incluyeron su traslado y

permanencia en los EEUU con todos los gastos pagados .. Para no afrontar (

la justicia GUERRA BASTIDAS fugo del Ecuador a mediados de enero del

2013, donde disfruta de los dineros mal habidos y otros beneficios

entregados por Chevron Corp.

En las siguientes paginas expongo los fundamentos de hecho y sus evidencias,

fundamentos de derecho, y las diligencias que proponemos que sean realizadas

para indagar, procesar y sancionar los distintos delitos que fueron cometidos por el

juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS.

Antecedentes

Como es de conocimiento publico, entre 1964 y 1990 la compania Chevron (antes

Texaco) fue operadora de un consorcio que ocasiono un grave desastre


ambiental y humane en el nororiente del Ecuador. Producto de 105 danos

ocasionados, las comunidades indigenas y campesinas afectadas presentaron en

1993 una accion judicial contra la compania en las cortes de Nueva York. Durante

casi 10 anos la petrolera lucho para que las cortes norteamericanas desestimen la

causa y la envien al Ecuador, alegando que la jurisdiccion ecuatoriana era el foro

adecuado donde debia resolverse este caso. Tras obtener exito y comprometerse

a someterse a la jurisdiccion ecuatoriana, el juicio se traslado a Ecuador en marzo

del 2003, que se presento una accion por danos ambientales contra

ChevronTexaco ante la Presidencia de la Corte Provincial de Sucumbios Guicio

No. 002-2003). Despues de 56 inspecciones judiciales, 118 informes periciales,

cerca de 64000 resultados de laboratorio y alrededor de 215000 paginas de

expediente, el 14 de febrero del 2011 el Presidente de la Corte Provincial de

Sucumbios, Nicolas Zambrano, emitio una sentencia condenatoria de 188 paginas

contra Chevron Corp. Esta sentencia fue ratificada en apelacion el 3 de enero del

2012 y se encuentra pendiente la resolucion del recurso de casacion por parte de

la Corte Nacional.

Este litigio ha sido conocido por mas de una decena de jueces. Solamente en

primera instancia el proceso judicial ha estado presidido por seis diferentes

magistrados, siendo que el primer juez que conocio el caso fue precisamente el

entonces Presidente de la Corte Provincial de Sucumbfos, ALBERTO GUERRA /

BASTIDAS, quien se mostro publicamente orgulloso -ante todos 105 medios de

comunicacion- par ser el responsable de admitir a tramite la demanda que origino

el famoso litigio, entre mayo y diciembre del 2003.

Con este antecedente ponemos en contexte la Declaracion Juramentada firmada

por GUERRA BASTIDAS, luego de que fuera destituido de sus funciones como

juez por haber manifestado repetida y publicamente que declararfa la nulidad de

"105 juicios de remediacion ambiental, principal mente contra la Empresa

CHEVRON -TEXACO" 1.

1 La Comisi6n de Recursos Humanos del Consejo de la Judicatura, mediante resoluci6n del 29 de mayo de 2008, a las llh30, resuelve destituir a GUERRA BASTIDAS por considerar "que e/ Juez sumariado, ho incurrido en fa/ta disciplinoria grove, al hober vertido su opinion sobre un proceso que oun no ho sido

Pagina 2 de 19


Se presenta a continuaci6n una lista no exhaustiva de los distintos delitos

cometidos por el ciudadano GUERRA BASTIDAS al prestarse para realizar una

injuriosa y perjura declaraci6n juramentada, con el agravante de que recibi6

enormes beneficios econ6micos de parte de la misma Chevron Corp.

EI cometimiento de varios delitos por parte de ALBERTO GUERRA

BASTIDAS:

EI dia 17 de noviembre del 2012, el juez destituido de la Corte Provincial de /

Sucumbios, ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS, a cambio de recibir pagos /

extraordinarios por mas de 326.000 US$ por parte de Chevron Corp?, realiz6 una

declaraci6n juramentada (en adelante "La Declaraci6n") ante notario publico en la

ciudad de Chicago, Estados Unidos (ANEXO 1), que no solo atenta contra la

verdad, sino que calumnia el buen nombre y reputaci6n de quienes firmamos esta

denuncia, de los demandantes en el juicio contra Chevron, y mas importante que

eso, termina agrediendo a la totalidad de la Funci6n Judicial.

Veremos que La Dec/araci6n realizada por el juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS

contiene una serie de aseveraciones falsas, y que contiene of ens as e injurias

contra el sistema judicial ecuatoriano, contra los demandantes del juicio contra

Chevron, y contra sus abogados y representantes. Estas declaraciones se suman

una serie de hechos igualmente difamatorios (declaraciones de testigos pagados,

anuncios pagados en la prensa, anuncios pagados en internet, etc.), financiados

siempre por Chevron Corp.3 Los firm antes denunciamos de manera expresa que

resuelto y que ya habia sido conocido por el cuando ostentaba la calidad de Presidente de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Nueva Loja, y que ademas forzosamente Ie corresponderfa volver a conocer" y "que dichas actuaciones afectan a la imagen de la Funci6n Judicial y la seguridad jurfdica de los usuarios de los servicios de justicia".Y el juicio al que el Juez destituido se referia era exactamente el que mantenemos en contra de Chevron Corporation. 2 Por los servicios prestados a la compania, Chevron Corp. ha admitido publicamente que otorgo a Guerra la posibilidad de vivir el"sueno americano" junto a 4 miembros de su familia, con todos los gastos pagados, en un monto que no bajaria de $ 326.000 dolares. VER, nota de prensa publicada por Chevron el dia 28 de enero del 2013. 3 Estas dedaraciones no son un hecho aislado. Es de conocimiento publico que el 31 de agosto del 2009 Chevron revelo una serie de videos en los que supuestamente se probaba que el juez de la causa de aquel entonces (Juan Nunez), los demandantes y el presidente del Ecuador, estaban involucrados en actos de corrupcion. Cuando la petrolera dio a conocer los videos afirm6 que estos fueron realizados por supuestos empresarios de remediacion, sin embargo investigaciones ulteriores demostraron que estos fueron realizados por un narcotraficante convicto Wayne Hansen y un contratista de larga data de Chevron Corp.,


mediante sus -bien remuneradas- declaraciones, estando bajo jura mento,

ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS ha incurrido al menos en los tipos penales

contemplados en los artfculos 128, 285, 295, 354 Y 489 del C6digo Penal:

En seguida explicaremos c6mo se configuraria cada uno de estos delitos a rafz de

que el juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS decidi6 emitir La Declaraci6n falsa e

injuriosa, a cambio de beneficios econ6micos.

I. Del perjurio cometido por GUERRA BASTIDAS

EI art. 354 del C6digo Penal dispone con total claridad que hay falso testimonio ,.

punible cuando al declarar, confesar, 0 inforrnar ante la autoridad publica, sea el

informante persona particular 0 autoridad, se falta a sabiendas a la verdad; y

perjurio, cuando se 10 hace con juramento. ( ... ) En La Declaraci6n emitida bajo

juramento por GUERRA BASTIDAS, el juez destituido falta a sabiendas a la vedad

en numerosas ocasiones - cada una de elias igualmente punible. Los siguientes

son algunos casos de perjurio incurridos por GUERRA BASTIDAS en La

Declaraci6n:

Diego Borja. La investigacion realizada tam bien demostro que no hubo ningun acto de corrupci6n y que las filmaciones fueron efectuadas con el unico objetivo de desprestigiar a la justicia ecuatoriana y afectar el juicio seguido por las comunidades del nororiente. En una conversacion privada de Borja, revelada con posterioridad, este se jacta de haber hecho en "ares dias?, ldos dias?" 10 que la petrolera no habia podido hacer en varios meses al obtener la separaci6n de caso del juez Nunez. Por su contribuci6n en la fabricaci6n de un engano, Hansen y Borja, las personas que realizaron las filmaciones, fueron generosamente compensados por Chevron. Diego Borja fue trasladado junto a su familia a Estados Unidos. A pesar de no realizar ningun trabajo para la petrol era, Borja recibe, desde su salida del Ecuador, un estipendio mensual de entre $5000 y $10000 d61ares mensuales. Ademas todos sus gastos son cubiertos por la petrolera. Entre los valores que Chevron cubre se encuentran los costos de: vehiculos, guardias de seguridad, impuestos y una casa totalmente amoblada, con piscina, dentro de una comunidad cerrada que limita con un campo de golf, que se alquila por $ 6,000 al meso La esposa de Borja, Sara Portilla, ha sido ademas contratada por Chevron y recibe otro salario mensual. En el caso de Wayne Hansen se conoce que este vivia una vida de lujos en Peru, donde huy6 de Estados Unidos poco tiempo despues de que fue lIamado a rendir declaraciones en relacion con las filmaciones secretas al juez Nunez.Lo ultimo que se supo de el es que vivia comodamente en Mancora, un pueblo costero ubicado al norte de Peru, donde habitaba en una casa de tres dormitorios con piscina y que contaba con servicio de camarera y cocinera, pagado por Chevron Corp.


1. Es falso que hubiera presiones para que GUERRA BASTIDAS acepte el

caso por danos ambientales contra Chevron Corp.; y es falso que

GUERRA BASTIDAS haya actuado por "temor".

Existen varios hechos y documentos de dominio publico que demuestran que la

declaracion remunerada del destituido juez GUERRA BASTIDAS, en la que afirma

que dudo sobre la validez de las pretensiones de los demandantes y que acepto

dar tramite al proceso por temor 0 presiones, es falsa e injuriosa.

Asr, si analizamos declaraciones de GUERRA BASTIDAS realizadas en el pasado

(cuando era Juez) y las contraponemos con las aseveraciones realizadas

recientemente, en la bien remunerada declaracion juramentada, se puede notar

que sus propios dichos sobre varios aspectos relacionados con el juicio se oponen

diametralmente. Por ejemplo, en la declaracion emit ida a cambio de

compensacion economica por el juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS, aste afirma

que:

"AI inicio del caso, dude sobre la validez de las pretensiones de los

demandantes, pero debido a la presi6n publica impuesta por los

representantes de los demandantes durante la primer a audiencia del caso,

permiti que el caso continuara porque percibi que al no hacerlo, mi

seguridad cor ria riesgo. II

En cambio, si revisamos afirmaciones realizadas por GUERRA BASTIDAS en

varios medios de comunicacion, podemos ver que el mismo GUERRA BASTIDAS,

actuando entonces como Juez, se encontraba orgulloso de su trabajo y

consideraba que la demanda de los demandantes debra ser admitida a juicio,

lIegando a declarar inclusive que asta es igual que cualquier otra demanda y que

no recibio ningun tipo de presion para dar tramite al caso.

Pagina 5 de 19


En el articulo titulado "Juez Guerra: la justicia nacional es competente,A

publicado el 20 de octubre del 2003 en Diario el Universo, al preguntarsele al

juez GUERRA BASTIDAS si un juicio contra una transnacional (Chevron

Corp.) demanda mayor responsabilidad, este responde que "Ia suficiente

responsabilidad, como igual demanda el interes de cualquier ciudadano

ecuatoriano". (Ver anexo 2)

En este articulo ademas se afirma que: "EI presidente de la Corte Superior de

Justicia de Nueva Loja, Alberto Guerra Bastidas, consider a que el juicio que 47

representantes indfgenas y campesinos de Orellana y Sucumbfos presentaron

contra la petrolera Chevron Texaco, por danos ambientales, es la oportunidad

para demostrar que la justicia ecuatoriana tiene principios de rectitud y

honestidad. "

En el mismo articulo GUERRA BASTIDAS reconoce la integridad del poder

judicial ecuatoriano y asegura que este no esta dispuesto a someterse a

presi6n de ningun tipo. AI preguntarsele si el proceso judicial seguido por las

comunidades sera transparente y garantizado, GUERRA BASTIDAS responde

que U ninguna persona, instituci6n 0 estado debe preocuparse".

Afirmaciones parecidas de parte de GUERRA BASTIDAS son recogidas en otro

articulo de prensa titulado "Discrepancias por transparencia en el proceso" ,

publicado en Diario el Universo el 21 de octubre del 20035, (ver anexo 3). En este

se reproduce la afirmaci6n del juez Guerra de que:

"Ninguna persona, instituci6n 0 Estado, debe dudar de la integridad de los

magistrados ecuatorianos;" esto frente al pedido de representantes de la

4 http://www.eluniverso.com/2003L10L20LOOOlL12L0963562EFD6F4E3DB13CEOF74D7EOEE.html

5 Nota de prensa publicada en el diaria el Universa, el dia 21 de octubre del 2003. http://www.eluniverso.com/2OD3/lD/21/0D01/12/F976BFlCF3174C6D8CBC7EDAC4877B4D.html

Pagina 6 de 19


iglesia y ambientalistas de que haya transparencia en el proceso y de que

no se sucumba ante el poderio economico de la compania.

T ambien en el articulo "Dos marchas apoyaran la audiencia en el juicio contra la

Chevron Texaco" publicado en EI Comercio, del 21 de octubre del 2003, existen

afirmaciones que demuestran que el entonces juez GUERRA BASTIDAS no actuo

bajo presiones al dar tramite a la causa seguida por las comunidades amazonicas.

En este articulo GUERRA BASTIDAS hace la siguiente afirmacion de forma libre y

voluntaria: "

Quiero dignificar la Justicia ecuatoriana haciendo 10 que manda la ley".

Inclusive cuando GUERRA BASTIDAS ya habia sido destituido de su cargo como

juez, hizo varias declaraciones publicas de manera libre y voluntaria. Estas

declaraciones son muy importantes porque fueron realizadas ante la prensa sin

que existiera la supuesta "presion" de ser el juez encargado del proceso. En el

articulo publicado en el Diario el Universo con fecha 18 de octubre del 2009 y

titulado: "Ex Juez pide se indaguen denuncias del proceso,6 GUERRA BASTIDAS

senala:

"que en su epoca no hubo presiones intemas ni externas. No obstante,

recuerda una /lamada telef6nica que en octubre del 2003 -dice- recibi6 del

entonces procurador general del Estado, Jose Maria Borja. "Me increp6.

Dijo que quien tenia que responder era el Estado ecuatoriano y senal6 que

en el termino de la audiencia dicte autos para expedir sentencia

desechando la demanda, sin abrir el termino de pruebas. Lo podia hacer,

pero yo decidi continuar ( ... )."

6 Nota de prensa publicada en el diario el Universo, el dia 18 de octubre del 2009.

http://www.eluniverso.com/2009/10/18/1/1356/ex-juez-pide-indaguen-denunciasproceso. html?p= 1354&m= 1775

Pagina 7 de 19 .~


Esta afirmacion de GUERRA BASTIDAS no solamente demuestra que no tuvo

ninguna presion por parte de los demandantes para que se acepte la demanda,

como el falsamente declara bajo juramento en su reciente declaracion

remunerada, sino que por el contrario, existieron presiones por parte del gobierno

para beneficiar a Chevron Corp., pero que GUERRA BASTIDAS entonces actuo

apegado a derecho e hizo respetar la independencia de la Funcion Judicial.

Queda asi demostrado que GUERRA BASTIDAS comete perjurio por faltar a la

verdad bajo juramento (y por remuneraci6n econ6mica) al asegurar que actuo bajo

presiones y por temor al aceptar a tramite la demanda por danos ambientales

contra Chevron Corp.

2. Es falso que existiera un pacto entre GUERRA BASTIDAS Y los

demandantes del juicio 002-2003

Ante esta afirmacion realizada por GUERRA BASTIDAS a cambio de retribucion

economica, es de observarse que el juez destituido no presenta ni una sola

evidencia ni demostracion de la verdad de 10 que sostiene. Si la existencia de

dicho pacto fuera cierta GUERRA BASTIDAS deberia estar en capacidad de

aportar pruebas documentales sobre su existencia, pues dicho pacto

supuestamente 10 involucraba al mismo declarante, que tendria, recibos,

comprobantes de depOsito, comunicaciones escritas, digitales, 0 cualquier otro

medio de comprobar al menos su participacion en el pacta ficticio.

Por cuanto esta declaracion constituye ademas delito de injurias calumniosas,

sera explicada mas adelante en esta misma denuncia.

3. Es falso que existiera un pacto entre los demandantes y el Juez

Nicolas Zambrano

De igual manera que sucede con la afirmacion de la existencia de un pacto entre

GUERRA BASTIDAS Y los demandantes, aste juez destituido no aporta ni una

sola evidencia que ampare sus dichos en cuanto a otro pacto supuestamente

entre los demandantes y el juez Zambrano, aun y cuando los hechos sobre los

Pagina 8 de 19 /

(


que declara implican graves acusaciones que rayan en el plano de la injuria

calumniosa grave, como tambien veremos mas adelante.

4. Es falso que GUERRA BASTIDAS no haya recibido dinero ni

compensaci6n de parte de Chevron.

GUERRA BASTIDAS en su declaraci6n juramentada afirma que no ha recibido

dinero alguno ni compensaci6n a cambio de firmar la declaraci6n juramentada,

como declara bajo juramento y que tampoco Ie han sido ofrecidos7.

Por otro lado, Chevron Corp. ha declarado publicamente que ha hecho un pacto

con el Dr. Guerra para pagarle la cantidad de 10.000 d61ares mensuales, mas

2.000 d61ares para vivienda, segura medico y gastos legales, todo el acuerdo es

por dos anos.8 (Ver anexo 5)

EI hecho de faltar a la verdad en cuanto a los motivos que lIevan a hacer La

Declaraci6n y ocultar la existencia de remuneraci6n econ6mica, no solamente

invalida la misma Declaraci6n, sino que constituye precisamente agravante para el

perjurio.

Comentario a los multiples casos de perjurio cometido por GUERRA

BASTIDAS Y sus agravantes.- Como resulta evidente, La Declaraci6n emitida

por GUERRA BASTIDAS esta plagada de principio a fin con aseveraciones falsas

y que no se corresponden con la realidad, sino que ha sido fabricada al gusto y

medida de Chevron Corp., a cambio de una generosa remuneraci6n econ6mica y

otros incentivos. La Declaraci6n es en realidad una bien remunerada historia

ficticia, que utiliza hechos y "evidencia" fabricada y/o sacada de contexte para

adaptarse a la necesidad del interesado.

7 Ver pag. 1 de la declaraci6n de GUERRA BASTIDAS: "No he solicitado ni recibido dinero alguno 0 ninguna remuneracion a cambio de firmar esta declaraci6n juramentada. Tampoco Se me ha ofrecido remuneraci6n alguna, presente 0 futura, a cambio de firmar esta declaracion" 8 Nota de prensa publicada oficialmente por Chevron el dia 28 de enero del 2013. Esta nota de prensa, al poco tiempo de haber sido publicada, fue retirada por Chevron y en su lugar se public6 otra nota de prensa, en la que se suprimi6 el parrafo que admitieron haber pactado con Guerra Bastidas. La nota de prensa Textualmente que esta en ingles, pero al traducirla al espanol textualmente se lee: "En una antrevista, al vocero de Chevron Kent Robertson tambian reconoce que Chevron ha realizado un compromiso de dos anos para pagar a la familia Guerra, un total de 10,000 d6lares por mes para gastos de manutenci6n y 2,000 d6/ares por mes para vivienda, ademas de los gastos de seguro de salud y costas legales·.

Pagina 9 de 1


Asi, mientras se revisa las afirmaciones de GUERRA BASTIDAS no puede

evitarse que su~an preguntas como,

• l,Por que los abogados de ChevrC?n, siempre prestos a solicitar la

recusaci6n de jueces, hasta por motivos insignificantes, no realizaron

ninguna denuncia ni recusaron al juez Zambrano, cuando GUERRA

BASTIDAS se aproximo para ofrecerles que a cambio de dinero Zambrano

fallaria a su favor? 0

• l,Si GUERRA BASTIDAS estaba implicado en la elaboracion de la'· .. sentencia, por que no hay una sola prueba (ni descontextualizada) que

relacione a Guerra con Zambrano 0 los demandantes en el 2011 cuando

esta fue elaborada?

• l,Por que si los demandantes tenian supuestamente una relacion con

Zambrano necesitarian a GUERRA BASTIDAS (que ya habia sido

destituido como juez de la Corte de Sucumbios por manifestar

publicamente que declararia nulo el juicio contra Chevron)?

• l,Por que GUERRA BASTIDAS afirma que cuando comenzo a ayudar a

Zambrano en la elaboracion de los documentos de la Corte 10 hizo porque

estaba afrontando una situacion economica dificil, y sin embargo sus

estados de cuenta (que estan como anexos en su declaracion) muestran q

tenia por 10 menos 16.000 US$ y su Hoja de Vida muestra que tenia

trabajo?

• l,Por que GUERRA BASTIDAS ha cambiado de opinion tan radicalmente

desde el inicio del juicio a la actualidad? l, Cuanto real mente Ie ha costado

Chevron Corp. obtener La Declaraci6n?

• l,Fue La Declaraci6n elaborada por GUERRA BASTIDAS 0 por los

abogados norteamericanos de Chevron? l,Por que se utiliza anglicanismos

en la supuesta declaracion original en espanol, como la palabra mocion (del

ingles motion), que en el sistema juridico ecuatoriano es poco usada?

En fin hay un sinnumero de preguntas cuya unica respuesta posible es que las

afirmaciones de GUERRA BASTIDAS en su declaracion son falsas, que GUERRA


BASTIDAS conoce de la falsedad de sus afirmaciones, y que estas obedecen a la

remuneraci6n recibida y al interes de Chevron.

II. De la injurias emitidas por GUERRA BASTIDAS

Segun el Art. 489 del C6digo Penal, la injuria es ca/umniosa, cuando consiste en /a

fa/sa imputaci6n de un defito; y, no ca/umniosa, cuando consiste en toda otra

expresi6n proferida en descredito, deshonra 0 menosprecio de otra persona, 0 en

cua/quier acci6n ejecutada con e/ mismo objeto. Como veremos, las declaraciones

por las que GUERRA BASTIDAS fue generosamente remunerado, contienen

multiples injurias calumniosas y no calumniosas, contra distintas personas, a las

que les achaca el cometimiento de varios delitos y desacredita en su honra y

reputaci6n.

1. Injurias no calumniosas contra los demandantes.

EI juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS injuria a Maria Aguida, a todos los

demandantes del juicio No.OO2-2003 contra Chevron, y a todos los

perjudicados por los danos ambientales, y todos los asistentes a la

audiencia de conciliaci6n, al afirmar que acept6 a tramite el juicio porque

percibi6 que su vida correria peligro si no 10 hacia9.

Como ya hemos revisado las declaraciones que de manera publica y ante

distintos medios de comunicaci6n hiciera el mismo GUERRA BASTIDAS en

la epoca en la que fue Juez, no abultaremos esta denuncia volviendo a

citarla, sino que lIamamos la atenci6n sobre la contradicci6n entre aquellas

y la desacreditaci6n que implica haber actuado por temor a los

demandantes, como si estos fueran maleantes 0 "personas de cuidado",

capaces de poner en riesgo su "seguridad personal".

9 Ver La Declaracion, pag. 1: /I ( ... ) AI inicio del caso, dude sabre la validez de las pretensiones de los demand antes, pero debido a la presion publica impuesta par los representantes de los demandantes durante la primera audiencia del caso, permiti que el caso continuara porque percibi que al no hacerlo, mi seguridad personal corna riesgo"


Asi, al manifestar que temia por su seguridad, GUERRA BASTIDAS da a

entender que la causa de su temor proviene de la amenaza que

representan los demandantes para su seguridad. Este descredito

injustificado contra los demandantes y sus representantes constituye delito

punible, como injuria.

2. Injurias calumniosas contra los abogados y/o los representantes de

los demandantes

Consideramos que GUERRA BASTIDAS en La Declaraci6n imputa

falsamente el cometimiento de al menos tres delitos hace contra los

abogados y los representantes de los demandantes, ya sea en conjunto 0

por separado y contra el juez Zambrano.

1. La primera injuria calumniosa emitida por GUERRA BASTIDAS consiste

en afirmar que los representantes de los demandantes del juicio

NO.002-2003 elaboraron la sentencia emitida el14 de febrero de 2011 1°. AI hacer esta afirmaci6n GUERRA BASTIDAS esta imputando

falsamente a los representantes de los demandantes el delito tipificado

en el CODIGO PENAL, Art. 339:

Sera reprimida con pena de seis a nueve aflos de reclusi6n menor,

cualquiera otra persona que hubiere cometido una fa/sedad en

instrumentos publicos, en escrituras de comercio 0 de banco,

contratos de prenda agricola 0 industrial 0 de prenda especial de

comercio, en escritos 0 en cualquier otra actuaci6n judicial:

Ya por firmas fa/sas;

Ya por imitaci6n 0 alteraci6n de letras 0 firmas;

Ya por haber inventado convenciones, disposiciones,

obligaciones 0 descargos, 0 por haberlos

10 Ver la Declaraci6n, pag. 6: "La oferta propuesta induia que los demandantes redactarian el borrador de la sentencia y el Juez Zambrano la firmaria y publica ria como de su autoria" y "me informe par (el Juez Zambrano) que los abogados de los demandantes habia redactado esa sentencia y Ie habian entregado".

Pagina 12 de 19


insertado fuera de tiempo en los document os;

Ya por adici6n 0 alteraci6n de las clausulas, declaraciones 0

hechos que esos documentos tenian por objeto recibir 0

comprobar.

Dado que ninguno de los demandantes, ni sus representantes ni abogados

hemos sido condenados por este delito (ni siquiera han sido acusados),

GUERRA BASTIDAS ha proferido una injuria calumniosa en nuestra

contra.

2. Luego, aunque esta imputaci6n de un delito esta relacionada a la

anterior, es distinta la afirmaci6n que hace GUERRA BASTIDAS, acerca

de que los abogados y representantes de los demandantes sobornaron

al juez Zambrano para que emita como suya la sentencia. En este caso

GUERRA BASTIDAS esta imputando a los abogados y representantes

de los demandantes el delito tipificado en el CODIGO PENAL, Art. 359:

Los que sobornaren testigos, peritos 0 interpretes, 0 los que a

sabiendas, hicieren uso en juicio, de testigos 0 peritos falsos, sea en

causa propia 0 de sus clientes 0 represent ados, seran reprimidos

como reos de falso testimonio 0 de perjurio, en su caso.

AI mismo tiempo que se imputa al juez Zambrano, el delito tipificado en el

CODIGO PENAL, Art. 337.-

Seran reprimidos con reclusion menor extraordinaria de nueve a

doce anos los funcionarios publicos que, en el ejercicio de sus

funciones hubieren cometido una falsedad que consista:

En firmas falsas;

En alteraci6n de actas, escrituras 0 firmas;

En suposicion de personas;


En escrituras hechas 0 interca/adas en registros u otros

documentos publicos, en escritos u otras actuaciones

judicia/es, despues de su formaci6n 0 c/ausura.

Dado que ninguno de los demandantes, ni sus representantes ni abogados,

ni el juez Zambrano, han sido condenado~ par este delito (ni siquiera han

sido acusados), GUERRA BASTIDAS ha preferido una injuria calumniosa

en su contra.

3. La tercera falsa imputaci6n de un delito que hace GUERRA BASTIDAS

es al afirmar que en el periodo entre octubre del 2009 y febrero del

2010, en que Zambrano sustanci6 el caso contra Chevron Corp., existia

un trato entre los demandantes con Zambrano y el mismo GUERRA

BASTIDAS para que se emitan resoluciones a favor de los

demandantes. Esta acusaci6n de igual modo imputa delito tanto al juez

Zambrano, como a los a abogados y representantes de los

demandantes. Siendo en este caso tambien pertinentes los artfculos 337

y 359 del C6digo Penal para la tipificaci6n de los delitos que GUERRA

BASTIDAS imputa falsamente a los demandantes, sus abogados y

representantes, y al juez Zambrano.

Dado que ninguno de los demandantes, ni sus representantes ni

abogados han sido condenados por este delito (ni siquiera han sido

acusados), GUERRA BASTIDAS ha preferido una injuria calumniosa

en su contra.

III. Ofensas contra instituciones publicas cometidas por GUERRA

BASTIDAS

En La Dec/araci6n realizada por GUERRA ZAMBRANO constan afirmaciones que

constituyen verdaderas ofensas contra la Administraci6n de Justicia y contra el

todo el Estado ecuatoriano. Estas declaraciones son punibles bajo el CODIGO

PENAL, Art. 128:

Pagina 14 de


E/ que publicamente, y fuera de los casos previstos en este C6digo, incitare

o fomentare por cua/quier medio e/ separatismo, 0 e/ que ofendiere 0

vilipendiare a/as instituciones publicas 0 a /a Fuerza Publica, e/ que

cometiere cua/quier bur/a 0 desacato, con pa/abras 0 acciones, contra /a

Bandera, e/ Escudo 0 e/ Himno de /a Patria, sera reprimido con prisi6n de

seis meses a tres anos y mu/ta de cuarenta y cuatro a ochenta y siete

d6/ares de los Estados Unidos de Norte America.

Todo el contenido de La Declaraci6n es ofensivo contra la majestad de la

Administraci6n de Justicia al describir multiples ilegalidades supuestamente

cometidas por los jueces encargados de administrar justicia. Dado que no consta

evidencia alguna de estas supuestas irregularidades, la ofensa sufrida por la

Funci6n Judicial del Ecuador no tiene justificaci6n alguna, y a mas de ser falsa,

constituye delito punible de of ens a contra las instituciones publicas.

IV. Auto-imputaci6n que hace GUERRA BASTIDAS en un delito que no se

ha realizado

EI juez destituido GUERRA BASTIDAS en su declaraci6n afirma haber participado

en actos renidos con la legislaci6n ecuatoriana, muchos de los cuales constituyen

delitos tipificados.11 Con estas declaraciones falsas, realizadas por remuneraci6n,

el destituido juez GUERRA BASTIDAS se esta efectivamente imputando a al

mismo el cometimiento de varios delitos que no han existido. Esta conducta se

encuentra tipificada en el CODIGO PENAL, Art. 295:

Todo aque/ que dentro de juicio ante e/ juez de instrucci6n 0 e/ de /a causa,

o extra judicia/mente, ante autoridades judicia/es 0 agentes de po/icfa, se

dec/are autor de un delito que no se ha rea/izado, 0 de un delito en e/ que

11 Ver La DecJaracion, pag. 7: "Yo sabia en ese momento, y 10 se hoy, que ese acuerdo del cual yo era participe, por el cuallos representantes de los demandantes redactaban la sentencia del caso de Chevron y el Juez Zambrano, can mi ayuda, la dictaba, era una violaci6n de las leyes ecuatorianas".


no ha tenido participaci6n, sera reprimido con prisi6n de tres meses ados

anos.

De este modo, al admitir su participacion en un delito que no ha existido y luego

fugarse al extranjero para no responder por esos supuestos delitos, GUERRA

BASTIDAS pretende involucrar a terceras personas que sf se encuentran en el

Ecuador.

v. Guerra Bastidas ha recibido dones y presentes por ejecutar un acto manifiestamente injusto.

Esta demostrado que GUERRA BASTIDAS ha aceptado recibir un paquete de

beneficios por mas de 326.000 US$ a cambio de haber firmado La Declaraci6n,

que supuestamente describe los hechos sucedidos durante su participacion como

juez ecuatoriano. Asf, para obtener su propio beneficio economico GUERRA

BASTIDAS ha procedido a cometer multiples casos de perjurio y varias injurias

calumniosas, 10 que convierte a sus actos en manifiestamente injustos.

EI segundo inciso del art. 285, dispone precisamente que seran reprimidos con

prision los que han aceptado ofertas 0 promesas, 0 recibido dones 0 presentes

por ejecutar en un acto manifiestamente injusto, por 10 que GUERRRA BASTIDAS

ha configurado el tipo penal.

Fundamentos de derecho

Bajo los fundamentos expuesto, los delitos de los que se acusa al juez destituido

ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS son los siguientes tipificados en el Cooigo Penal: /

• Art. 128.- EI que ptiblicamente, y fuera de los casos previstos en este

C6digo, incitare 0 fomentare por cua/quier medio e/ separatismo, 0 e/ que

ofendiere 0 vilipendiare a/as instituciones ptiblicas 0 a /a Fuerza Publica, e/

que cometiere cua/quier burla 0 desacato, con pa/abras 0 acciones, contra ,

la Bandera, el Escudo 0 e/ Himno de la Patria, sera reprimido con prisi6n de


seis meses a tres anos y multa de cuarenta y cuatro a ochenta y $iete

d61ares de los Estados Unidos de Norte America.

• Art. 285.- Todo funcionario publico y toda persona encargada de un servicio

publico que aceptaren oferta 0 promesa, 0 recibieren dones 0 presentes,

para ejecutar un acto de su empleo U oficio, aunque sea justo, pero no

sujeto a retribuci6n, seran reprimidos con prision de seis meses a tres anos

y multa de ocho a dieciseis d61ares de los Estados Unidos de Norte

America, a mas de la restituci6n del duplo de 10 que hubieren percibido.

Seran reprimidos con prision de uno a cinco anos y multa de seis a treinta y

un dolares de los Estados Unidos de Norte America a mas de restituir el

triple de 10 percibido, si han aceptado ofertas 0 promesas, 0 recibido dones

o presentes bien sea por ejecutar en el ejercicio de su empleo u oficio un

acto manifiestamente injusto; bien por abstenerse de ejecutar un acto de su

obligacion.

• Art. 295.- Todo aquel que dentro de juicio ante el juez de instrucci6n 0 el de

la causa, 0 extrajudicialmente, ante autoridades judiciales 0 agentes de

policia, se declare autor de un delito que no se ha realizado, 0 de un delito

en el que no ha tenido participacion, sera reprimido con prision de tres

meses ados anos.

• Art. 354.- Hay falso testimonio punible cuando al dec/arar, confesar, 0

informar ante la autoridad publica, sea el informante persona particular 0

autoridad, se falta a sabiendas a la verdad; y perjurio, cuando se 10 hace

con juramento.

Se exceptUan los casos de confesion e indagatoria de los sindicados en los

juicios penales, y los informes de las autoridades cuando puedan

acarrear/es responsabilidad penal.

• Art. 489. - La injuria es: Calumniosa, cuando consiste en la fa/sa imputacion

de un delito; y, No ca/umniosa, cuando consiste en toda otra expresi6n

proferida en descredito, deshonra 0 menosprecio de otra persona, 0 en


cua/quier acci6n ejecutada con e/ mismo objeto.

Diligencias a Practicarse

Los denunciantes, de la manera mas respetuosa, fundamentandonos en el Art.

195 de la Constituci6n de la Republica del Ecuador, solicitamos que se realicen

todas las diligencias necesarias a fin de esclarecer los hechos aqui denunciados.

Como parte de la investigaci6n que usted senor Fiscal debera dirigir, nos

permitimos sugerir la practica de las siguientes diligencias:

Que se nombre un experto informatico de la lista de que reposa en el

Consejo de la Judicatura de Sucumbios; y, en caso que en dicha lista no

exista un peri to informatico acto para cumplir con esta diligencia, se debera

oficiar al Departamento de Analisis Forense e informatico de la Fiscalia

General del Estado, para que real ice un peritaje de la computadora en la

que el ex presidente Subrogante de la Corte de Sucumbios, Nicolas

Zambrano, realiz6 la sentencia en el caso seguido por las comunidades

amaz6nicas contra la compania Chevron y que informe si es que la

sentencia fue realizada en dicha computadora y en caso de haberlo

realizado que establezca el periodo de tiempo en que esta fue realizada.

Previamente se debera oficiar al Director Provincial del Consejo de la

Judicatura de Sucumbios, para que certifique documentadamente cual fue

o cuales fueron, la 0 las computadora/as que utiliz6 el Abogado Nicolas

Zambrano Lozada mientras ejerci6 sus funciones de Juez provincial; esas

mismas computadoras son las que deberan ser objeto de la investigaci6n

que estamos solicitando.

Que se recepte las versiones de los abogados y funcionarios de la

compania Chevron con los que Alberto Guerra dice en su declaraci6n que

tuvo reuniones para ofrecerles un fallo favorable a cambio de dinero.

Que se investigue la existencia de otras cuentas bancarias a nombre de

ALBERTO GUERRA BASTIDAS 0 de bienes que pudieran haber side

puestos a su nombre.

Pagina 18


Que se recepte la version del Abogado Nicolas Zambrano Lozada, a fin que

responda ante todas las acusaciones formuladas por el Dr. Alberto Guerra

Bastidas.

Que se realicen todas las diligencias necesarias a fin de lograr esclarecer

en forma absoluta los distintos tipos de delitos aqui denunciados.

Domicilio Judicial

Cualquier notificacion dentro del presente tramite la recibiremos en los casilleros

judicial NO.78 Y 45 de la ciudad de Nueva Loja, Provincia de Sucumbios. A la vez

que autorizamos al Dr. Guillermo Ortiz Vasquez, para que pueda comparecer y

representar los derechos e intereses de los comparecientes.

s prestos a reconocer nuestras firmas por la denuncia

\ ,

PIS'CALlA PROVINCIAL DE SUCUMBIOS

Reclbhi~'r Nueva Loja hoy..JS_, .• ~.-----__ :!e.tl.-______ dtLUll~a 1as..\5i1l-~ __________ ,._.coPiasyadjunta_.-:l:2:l_=-.--

AnexOl- Certlfico

EiECRETAR ISCALES

Pagina 19 de 19

Documents

PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR FOR THE DISTRICT OF SUCUMBÍOS I ... · Page 3 of 19 [initials] CERT. MERRILL VER: JD . The following is a nonexhaustive list of the different crimes GUERRA