Caso ANDIS: Spagnuolo pidió suspender el peritaje de los audios y cuestionó el pendrive que analiza Gendarmería

Diego Spagnuolo, former director of the National Agency for People with Disabilities (ANDIS), has renewed his request to suspend the forensic analysis of audio recordings linked to a corruption investigation. The legal team representing Spagnuolo, comprising lawyers Mauricio D’Alessandro and Pablo Parera, filed a motion before Judge Ariel Lijo in Buenos Aires, challenging the validity of the evidence being examined by the Argentine National Gendarmería. The central issue revolves around a USB drive containing 58 files, which were handed over to authorities by journalist Mauro Federico in August 2025. The defense argues that these files have not been formally documented or integrated into the case file. They further claim there is no proof confirming that the contents match the publicly released audio clips that sparked the investigation. According to the motion, the Cámara Federal de Buenos Aires had previously ordered an inquiry solely into the origin and authenticity of the recordings that appeared in media outlets. This discrepancy raises concerns about the scope and integrity of the current forensic process. The audio files allegedly feature Spagnuolo discussing alleged price-fixing practices within ANDIS and referencing financial allocations meant for Karina Milei, the secretary-general of the presidency, and Eduardo “Lule” Menem. The defense emphasized that the case file lacks detailed information regarding the 58 files, nor is there any documentation verifying their alignment with the public recordings. Additionally, they questioned how the device was preserved, noting that it was received by the court without an inventory, a receipt, or a cryptographic hash, a tool used to ensure data integrity. The delay in handling the USB drive has drawn attention. It was only delivered to the judicial office on July 14, 2026, nearly a year after its initial handover by Federico. As a result, the defense contends that prior to proceeding with the forensic examination, a forensic extraction should have taken place with all parties involved. This would allow them to identify the specific files under review and propose targeted areas for expert analysis. The Gendarmería has already initiated the forensic analysis, which includes periodic meetings between official experts and specialists appointed by the involved parties. However, before the study progresses, Spagnuolo’s legal team has once again requested its suspension. Their demand specifically calls for excluding the USB drive from the analysis and limiting the forensic work to the publicly disseminated audio clips. This request follows a previous refusal by Spagnuolo to provide a verified vocal sample for comparison with the recorded content. He argued that such a measure could constitute self-incrimination and filed a challenge against Judge Lijo’s decision. That challenge is still pending before the Cámara Federal.