The oral and public trial of former Peace Judge of La Catedral (2nd Shift) Nathalia Guadalupe Garcete Aquino, in the case known as the 'promissory note mafia', was postponed for the second time. The new date, set by the Specialized Economic Crimes Trial Court, is August 24 at 8 a.m. The court is presided over by Judge Matías Garcete and composed of Adriana Planás and Sonia Sánchez.
The start of the trial, which had already been rescheduled for May 18 (originally set for March 10), was postponed again due to pending resolutions. Among them, an appeal against the opening of the case for oral trial and a challenge against the appellate judges who make up the Court of Appeals, which depend on a ruling from the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice.
In addition to Garcete, the following are to be tried: actuary Olivia Mosqueda, lawyers Sun Young Bang (from Plan Urbano), José Olmedo and César Bogarín (from Companhia Administradora de Riscos SA – Carsa), and bailiffs Óscar Rivela and Cristian Martínez. Also pending are preliminary hearings for defendants Alfredo Samudio Benítez and Édgar Fabián Ayala Melo, for whom the Public Prosecutor's Office requests an oral trial for alleged participation in the scheme.
On November 20, 2025, the Jury for the Impeachment of Magistrates (JEM) removed Garcete from the position of Peace Judge of La Catedral (2nd Shift), after confirming poor performance in executive proceedings that caused 'harm and damage'. The then head of the body, Supreme Court Justice César Garay Zuccolillo, stated that Garcete's actions had 'nefarious consequences, which led to exclusions from the financial system without possibility of reintegration' and that 'fundamental human rights were violated in the victims, whose salaries were improperly and illegally deducted'. Garcete is the only peace judge removed so far by the JEM, where the Peace Judge of Encarnación, Analía Cibils, and the Peace Judge of La Catedral (1st Shift), Enmanuel Villalba, are still under process.
According to the prosecution, between 2022 and 2024, collection companies, through their legal representatives, promoted preparatory actions for executive judgment and executive judgments with credit instruments based on promissory notes without indication of the beneficiary. The scheme involved the falsification of payment notifications and summonses, as well as executive attachments that were not effectively carried out by the bailiffs. The magistrates, aware of the falsity, issued rulings favorable to the plaintiffs, 'twisting the law', according to the Public Prosecutor's Office.