The defense of the former director of Sartor General Administrator of Funds (AGF), Óscar Ebel, assured that the request for house arrest against him responds to the cooperation agreement signed with the Public Ministry and marked distance from the accused for whom the Prosecutor’s Office requested preventive detention, claiming that they would have acted “malicously” in the facts investigated.
The statement was known after the formalization of the so-called Sartor Case was concluded, an instance in which the Oriente Metropolitan Prosecutor’s Office requested preventive detention for six of the eleven defendants, including the businessman and former president of Azul Azul, Michael Clark, while for other defendants it asked for less burdensome precautionary measures, such as house arrest and rooting.
In that context, Ebel’s defense emphasized that the precautionary measure requested against him is explained by the collaboration he has provided during the investigation.
“The precautionary arrest imposed on Óscar Ebel is given in the cooperation agreement signed by this defense with the Public Ministry. From our point of view, we are confident that the investigation will clearly establish the criminal responsibilities of those who acted maliciously in the various formalized crimes, to whom the Public Ministry is requesting preventive detention,” said lawyer Alejandro Espinoza.
The defender added that there is a difference between those who, in the opinion of the Prosecutor’s Office, participated maliciously in the events and those who, eventually, could have incurred administrative infractions.
“Respect to those who, being able to have committed administrative infractions, as established by the CMF, did not act maliciously or benefit from the irregularities committed, that is the case of Mr. Ebel,” he said.
Prosecutor’s Office highlighted the cooperation of some defendants
After completing the statement of charges, the prosecutor of Alta Complexity Oriente, Juan Pablo Araya, explained that the request for precautionary measures responds to the level of participation attributed to each accused and to the collaboration provided during the investigation.
As he indicated, preventive detention was requested for the directors or partners who would integrate the central core of decisions within Sartor, while other defendants were left out of that petition due to effective cooperation agreements or because the background gathered so far places them in a different position within the facts investigated.
The self-denunciation that marked the case
Ebel’s situation contrasts with that of other defendants because he was one of the first executives of the group to collaborate with the Prosecutor’s Office.
As previously revealed by BBCL Investiga, the former director filed a self-denunciation a few days after the Sartor Case broke out, delivering background on alleged operations with conflicts of interest, credits granted to related companies and possible irregularities within the administrator.
In that presentation, he also maintained that many of the operations in question were approved on the basis of information provided by the company’s administration and expressed his willingness to collaborate with the criminal investigation.
The hearing will continue next Monday, when the court resumes the discussion of the pending precautionary measures for the main defendants and hears the arguments of the defenses.
Published on 07/31/2026 in:
