From the government to the U.S. Court: ‘To not accept the case will have a destructive impact on the country’

Lead Articles:

 

Clarin: “Lorenzino: “To convince the U.S. courts”” (no byline)

 

La Nacion: “Request from the government to the U.S. Supreme Court” by Silvia Pisani

In a brief, says it is “vital” that the highest court accept taking the case

 

Infobae: “From the government to the U.S. Court: ‘To not accept the case will have a destructive impact on the country’” by: Leandro Gabin

 

Clarin

Lorenzino: “To convince the U.S. courts”

 

Friday, September 13, 2013

 

Economy Minister Hernán Lorenzino yesterday expressed his hope that the government can convince the U.S. Supreme Court and the holdouts that "the only solution" is to restructure the debt in default.

 

Introducing the 2014 Budget, in the House of Deputies, the Economy Minister said that "we hope to be able to convince the courts and creditors who did not participate in the swap in 2005 and 2010, that the only solution is to go from 93% to 100% of the debt restructured on equal terms.”

 

The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Wednesday that it would include, in the Conference of September 30, the appeal which Argentina raised about the ruling of October 26, 2012, and which was upheld by the decision of Judge Thomas Griesa which said that Argentina violated the clause of "pari passu" (equal treatment of creditors).

 

However, whatever the decision reached by the U.S. Supreme Court, the “stay”, which halts the order of payment of US $1.330 billion to the holdouts, and ordered by the Court of Appeals of New York, will remain in force.

 

Yesterday, the national government paid US $2.070 billion for principal and interest on the Bonar VII, using Central Bank reserves that stood at US $35.231 billion.

 

The yesterday’s obligation was the most important thing that the administration of Cristina Fernández will face in the last quarter of the year, since this year the coupon attached to growth will not be paid in December. In addition, it was the last look at the ruling for the Supreme Court to decide whether it accepts taking the case or not. On Wednesday, President Cristina Kirchner had said at Technopolis "we will pay U $2.070 billion on the Bonar VII which is part of the restructuring of the debt.”

 

 

La Nacion

Request from the government to the U.S. Supreme Court

In a brief, says it is “vital” that the highest court accept taking the case

 

Friday, September 13, 2013

 

by Silvia Pisani  | LA NACION

 

WASHINGTON- With the suggestive silence that is being maintained by the government of Barack Obama in the case of the "vulture funds", Argentina’s defense lawyers decided to speak on its behalf and told the Supreme Court that - although Washington has not said it at this instance - it is a "critical" issue for the White House, making it advisable that the high court consider it.

 

The dispute includes issues that are 'critical to United States , which already led to "two recourses" in earlier stages of the process, says the text of 16 pages with which Argentina went back to knocking on the door of this country's highest court yesterday. "It is vital" that the case be opened and be accepted, the brief said.

 

The presentation was in agreement with statements from Economy Minister Hernán Lorenzino, who, in Buenos Aires, spoke of his "hope" to "convince" the Supreme Court that the "only way out" for creditors is to accept the debt swap, something that they already rejected twice.

 

While speaking on the budget, Lorenzino also explained that, whatever the decision of the Court, the suspension (stay) that now reigns over adverse rulings and protects the country from their execution, is not in jeopardy. In contrast to the warnings from some lawyers who follow the case, Lorenzino said that, even if the Court rejected the case, this umbrella would stay in place and that its removal – he suggested - depends on other procedural steps.

 

In 15 days, the Court will open the folder of the Argentine case to decide if it will take the case or not. Scheduled for the 30th, there is the possibility that the decision will be immediate. Those following the case pointed to the fact that, in addition to the difficulties facing the Argentina, an eventual recusal of Justice Sonia Sotomayor could be added. "In that case, it would be more complex for Argentina to get the backing it needs” to exit its airy trance, LA NACION heard.

 

Yesterday, the Government submitted a new letter that replicates the arguments of its job seekers who, last August 29, claimed that the Court not should "waste scarce resources" on a country that "defies (American) courts" and threatens to not abide by adverse rulings.

 

Lawyer Jonathan Blackman - defending our country- asked that their expressions in this sense be interpreted as the manifestation of "enormous concern" in a country that "abides by rulings and legal standards". He also insisted that it is "unacceptable" for American justice to cross borders and agreements between parties to calm the desires of a group of creditors. "This violates the act of sovereign immunity" for investors, says the brief, to reiterate an argument rejected on two previous instances.

 

Argentina has already had an adverse ruling first from Judge Thomas Griesa, then upheld by the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court is the final sat, so it all depends now on its justices accepting the case or not.

 

 

 

Infobae

From the government to the U.S. Court: ‘To not accept the case will have a destructive impact on the country’

 

Friday, September 13, 2013

 

by: Leandro Gabin

 

Infobae had access to a brief sent by Argentina to the highest U.S. court in response to the statements of the holdouts. It again warns about the consequences of not taking the cause because it would set off additional claims for another US$15 billion if the ruling is unfavorable.

 

The Argentine government, through the firm of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, on Wednesday filed a new brief before the United States Supreme Court. Lawyer Jonathan Blackman, who represents the country, again went on the attack over the consequences of not reviewing the case.

 

In a part of the brief, they made it clear what could happen. "This case deserves the Court’s review over the destructive impact on the Nation and the people of Argentina, the US$75 billion in restructured debt, and processes of restructuring ahead."

 

The country’s brief comes as a response to the brief filed by the group of holdouts, led by Singer Paul of Elliott Management, in order to block the Argentine petition to the Supreme Court. On this occasion, the lawyers in the country returned to raising the specter of a default.

 

They say that the rulings endanger debt payments of US$24 billion that are already being paid, if US$1.3 billion is paid to the vulture funds. "But Argentina will be exposed to new claims of US$15 billion,” it warns.  

 

"That the government officials are showing concern about this situation does not mean that they are being defiant. Argentina has been complying with the decisions of courts and it is of vital interest to have the attention of the Court," they added in the brief.

 

In another passage, it also stresses to the Court that for "the United States these themes are critical since it has already sent two briefs" supporting the position of the country in lower courts.

 

What the country’s lawyers don’t say is that in the last time, the government of Barack Obama dismissed that support. In fact, it didn’t want the issue of vulture funds to be under discussion at the G20 and didn’t send a recommendation to the Court that it should review the Argentine case.

 

Whatever it was, this new brief from Argentina will be the last before the Court, at least on this claim of "pari passu".  Now the holdouts may not continue responding to the briefs from Cleary Gottlieb.

 

All that remains is that on September 30, with the cards on the table, the nine members of the court will decide if the battle of Argentina against the holdouts deserves its time. It’s all unknown.