Former Paraguayan Petroleum Company (Petropar) president Sergio Escobar Amarilla was sentenced Tuesday, August 25, 2026, to three years in prison for breach of trust. The unanimous decision by the Trial Court found that he failed to properly oversee a contract to electrify the mills at Petropar’s alcohol plant in Mauricio José Troche, causing an estimated loss of G. 12 billion.
The panel consisted of judges Adriana Planás and Elsa García and Judge Matías Garcete. During the reading of the decision, Planás said that a three-year sentence was the fair sanction for Escobar Amarilla. The precautionary measures imposed on the former executive were maintained.
Prosecutors argued that Escobar, as head of the state-owned company and an authorized expenditure officer, had a duty to protect the institution’s assets. According to the investigation, he allowed the contract to proceed despite the limited progress of the works, failed to enforce the guarantees at the appropriate time, and did not terminate the agreement despite the delays.
The project was put out to tender at the end of 2012 and awarded in March 2013 to MGA Consultora, also identified as MGA Constructora, represented by Michael Azuaga. Contract PRE No. 232/2013 provided for the supply, installation and commissioning of the equipment, with a total value of G. 24 billion and a 180-day deadline.
During execution, initial payments of G. 7.2 billion and G. 4.8 billion were made. Prosecutors said that contract changes increased the advance payment to as much as 50%, even though the company completed only a minimal portion of the work and did not finish electrifying the mills.
Former industrial plant manager Leoncio Saúl González was acquitted. The Public Prosecutor’s Office sought his acquittal because it concluded that his position did not give him authority to decide on the funds, contract changes or final measures concerning the agreement.
The case began on March 9, 2014, when then anti-corruption prosecutor Victoria Acuña filed the charges. Appeals, recusals and other procedural disputes, including issues reviewed by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, kept the case in litigation for more than 12 years before the verdict.