Should Argentina Default On Its Debt?

[ArielFabian]

Which other laws should a court ignore? based on which criteria?

Appendix 3 The terms of the bonds
"…… The republic has in the fiscal agency agreement irrevocably submitted to the jurisdiction of any New York state or federal court sitting in the Borough of Manhattan … The republic agrees that a final nonappealable judgment in any such related proceeding ('the related judgment') shall be conclusive and binding upon it and may be enforced in any specified court or in any other courts to the jurisdiction of which the republic is or may be subject (the 'other courts') by a suit upon such judgment. ... the republic has hereby irrevocably agreed not to claim and has irrevocably waived such immunity to the fullest extent permitted by the laws of such jurisdiction … "

http://www.bailii.or...iv/2010/41.html

As far as I know, according to the Argentinean law if a clause is signed, and this clause is against other law then this agreement can become not valid. For instance, let's say that you work in a company, and you sign a contract saying you agree to work for 1 dollar, with no vacations, work 24 hours a day from Monday to Monday without basic rights, the contract is not valid for the employer since it is against the national constitution or other laws. Basically when something is contrary to the law, even if signed, might not be valid. In the best of cases sometimes you might accuse to whom signed the contract of fraud, since promised something, and he had no power to do this according to the constitution or any other law. But here if there is more than 1 country involved... I do not know what could happen, it could be a mess since American law is different, and might consider Arg as responsible according to its law.

I have never been fond of Evita and Tucap Amaru organization thoughts, and I disagree because of their ideology, I cannot explain my personal reasons since it might be harmful for other persons; I believe that majority does not share their thoughts, and wants a fair solution peacefully, even not being directly responsible of the high levels of corruption, many Argentinean retirees will not agree to pay 100% to the vulture funds because the state owes money to them, many Argentineans were affected in the past by "el corralito", having USD accounts and because they did not have the cash, they were forced to exchange their savings by bonds and then sell the bonds in a ridiculous price to get some cash back. Yes, this is the past... and has nothing to be with the present, but not sure if this could be used as an argument in a court. I believe most likely Argentina will default for a while and somehow we will be affected again with more restrictions than before, may be some persons get paid with bonds, etc. But, yes! the Appendix 3 is there, could be respected, it is other possibility, I think if this is applied in favour of the vulture funds is going to be very unfair even if it is legal, because the only who will not be affected will be it just for having a better access to the justice.

 

[dennisr]

And so this Singer f*** with a 1-3% holding in Argentina's defaulted bonds is now controlling and impeding payment to the settled bond holders: ~90%. He has gone from a minority stake holder to the only stake holder because of "the rule of law." Nothing wrong with this picture?

 

[ajoknoblauch]

As far as I know, according to the Argentinean law if a clause is signed, and this clause is against other law then this agreement can become not valid. For instance, let's say that you work in a company, and you sign a contract saying you agree to work for 1 dollar, with no vacations, work 24 hours a day from Monday to Monday without basic rights, the contract is not valid for the employer since it is against the national constitution or other laws. Basically when something is contrary to the law, even if signed, might not be valid. In the best of cases sometimes you might accuse to whom signed the contract of fraud, since promised something, and he had no power to do this according to the constitution or any other law. But here if there is more than 1 country involved... I do not know what could happen, it could be a mess since American law is different, and might consider Arg as responsible according to its law.

I have never been fond of Evita and Tucap Amaru organization thoughts, and I disagree because of their ideology, I cannot explain my personal reasons since it might be harmful for other persons; I believe that majority does not share their thoughts, and wants a fair solution peacefully, even not being directly responsible of the high levels of corruption, many Argentinean retirees will not agree to pay 100% to the vulture funds because the state owes money to them, many Argentineans were affected in the past by "el corralito", having USD accounts and because they did not have the cash, they were forced to exchange their savings by bonds and then sell the bonds in a ridiculous price to get some cash back. Yes, this is the past... and has nothing to be with the present, but not sure if this could be used as an argument in a court. I believe most likely Argentina will default for a while and somehow we will be affected again with more restrictions than before, may be some persons get paid with bonds, etc. But, yes! the Appendix 3 is there, could be respected, it is other possibility, I think if this is applied in favour of the vulture funds is going to be very unfair even if it is legal, because the only who will not be affected will be it just for having a better access to the justice.

So Argentine law supersedes every place else in the world? This will certainly improve the country's access to international credit. ¡Pax argentina pro sulum!

 

[Don Alberto]

As far as I know, according to the Argentinean law if a clause is signed, and this clause is against other law then this agreement can become not valid. For instance, let's say that you work in a company, and you sign a contract saying you agree to work for 1 dollar, with no vacations, work 24 hours a day from Monday to Monday without basic rights, the contract is not valid for the employer since it is against the national constitution or other laws. Basically when something is contrary to the law, even if signed, might not be valid. In the best of cases sometimes you might accuse to whom signed the contract of fraud, since promised something, and he had no power to do this according to the constitution or any other law. But here if there is more than 1 country involved... I do not know what could happen, it could be a mess since American law is different, and might consider Arg as responsible according to its law.

I have never been fond of Evita and Tucap Amaru organization thoughts, and I disagree because of their ideology, I cannot explain my personal reasons since it might be harmful for other persons; I believe that majority does not share their thoughts, and wants a fair solution peacefully, even not being directly responsible of the high levels of corruption, many Argentinean retirees will not agree to pay 100% to the vulture funds because the state owes money to them, many Argentineans were affected in the past by "el corralito", having USD accounts and because they did not have the cash, they were forced to exchange their savings by bonds and then sell the bonds in a ridiculous price to get some cash back. Yes, this is the past... and has nothing to be with the present, but not sure if this could be used as an argument in a court. I believe most likely Argentina will default for a while and somehow we will be affected again with more restrictions than before, may be some persons get paid with bonds, etc. But, yes! the Appendix 3 is there, could be respected, it is other possibility, I think if this is applied in favour of the vulture funds is going to be very unfair even if it is legal, because the only who will not be affected will be it just for having a better access to the justice.

So you will find it fair, that if I borrow 10 000 pesos from you, and when I should pay it back, I say: "I have spent the money, so I won't pay you. You can get 600 pesos a year over the next five years - take it or leave it!" Fair, isn't it?

A large number of German and Italian pensioners lost 75 percent of their pension savings because Argentina wasted the money.

"Argentinean retirees will not agree to pay 100%" but do you find it OK that German and Italian pensioners lost most of their pensions?

 

[Don Alberto]

And so this Singer f*** with a 1-3% holding in Argentina's defaulted bonds is now controlling and impeding payment to the settled bond holders: ~90%. He has gone from a minority stake holder to the only stake holder because of "the rule of law." Nothing wrong with this picture?

Sure, Singer first forced Argentina to borrow 90 billion US$ under New York law, and then he forced the Argentine government to steal and waste every cent of it, didn't he?

I don't like hedge funds and people like Singer, but it was Argentina, which borrowed and wasted the money, as usual claiming that "it is somebody else's fault".

 

[French jurist]

Another one for the so-called independance of the US Justice system (France is heavily corrupted too, not bashing the US people here who are good folks)

http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/01/supreme-court-rules-for-daimler-in-argentina-human-rights-case.php

And Obama supported Daimler (didn't search for a link, you can search it) declaring it would be bad for American business. (Separation of Powers B) )

Was the same situation before with Shell in Nigeria.

etc.

USA & France have been the first countries to lead with a certain idea of Freedom, Justice, etc. (other countries too, referring to the late 18th cent.).
Where are they now? the US? A weird plutocracy where most of the parliamentarians are millionaires, where the 4th power didn't play its role during the war in Iraq (no need to explain why I guess), where a recount for the presidential elections was done in a State governed by one of the candidate's brother (Nice one), where the Bin Laden's family and 140 Saudis were allowed to fly out of the US after 9/11 (and the Bin Laden family saved a business of Bush Jr when he was young)... Shall I go on?

France has different problems, many similars (freedom of the Press, independance of Justice). Last in date being that the French party that got the most votes during the EU elections is ruled by Marine Le Pen (who likes to dance in Austria with ex-Waffen SS). Would be anocdetical except for the nuclear weapons France has.

Here's France Doomsday machine! (ok got one test failure, but engineers are already working on a bigger version anyway). Will be fun under the control of an Extreme-Right party.

Griesa's decision is not innocent. We'll note though that an US Judge doesn't take into account the moral/ethical/fair aspect (could happen in a Latin country Camberiu, what system would you prefer?). To make win a guy who escapes his US taxes (but gave like 1 million USD to the Republican party? Huh?), with a strange Pari passu interpretation...

Well, I might be wrong and Justice might be truly independent in the US. In which case I apologize.

 

[French jurist]

Sure, Singer first forced Argentina to borrow 90 billion US$ under New York law, and then he forced the Argentine government to steal and waste every cent of it, didn't he?

I don't like hedge funds and people like Singer, but it was Argentina, which borrowed and wasted the money, as usual claiming that "it is somebody else's fault".

History is more complicated than facts. Part of the debt was an "odious" one, so who financed the AR dictature? Also Argentina applied the IMF policies during the 1990s, corruption doesn't explain it all (or at least explains the IMF "brains" didn't think of that aspect).

Should Argentines pay with their lives nowadays (because a crisis generates suicides, etc.).

 

[ArielFabian]

So Argentine law supersedes every place else in the world? This will certainly improve the country's access to international credit. ¡Pax argentina pro sulum!

I don't rule the country and I have been affected too like many others by corruption; my only crime is not being a heroe to fix it. If Arg signed that accepts money this is a fact, but if signs that the justice will be applied in other country, I am not sure if this is legal.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

I don't rule the country and I have been affected too like many others by corruption; my only crime is not being a heroe to fix it. If Arg signed that accepts money this is a fact, but if signs that the justice will be applied in other country, I am not sure if this is legal.

Huh? Legally, all Argentines are responsible for the debts; fairness is a more abstract question.

 

[ArielFabian]

So you will find it fair, that if I borrow 10 000 pesos from you, and when I should pay it back, I say: "I have spent the money, so I won't pay you. You can get 600 pesos a year over the next five years - take it or leave it!" Fair, isn't it?

A large number of German and Italian pensioners lost 75 percent of their pension savings because Argentina wasted the money.

"Argentinean retirees will not agree to pay 100%" but do you find it OK that German and Italian pensioners lost most of their pensions?

All these scenarios you described are unfair; what is not unfair to me is that if the ship sunk because of whatever (corruption, waste of $, etc) and now there is no $ for everybody just 1 to get the total back.

The corruption, waste of $, etc. is other history, and I agree with you it existed and is not fair either.