Police News

Santa Cruz Municipal Inspector Reported for Allegedly Accepting Bribes

Esta publicación también está disponible en: Español

A municipal inspector from Santa Cruz was reported on March 6th for possible crimes of extortion and not fulfilling duties.

The District Attorney’s Office of Santa Cruz and the District Attorney’s Office of Integrity, Transparency and Anti-Corruption reported that the case is in the accusation stage and next will be submitted to the criminal court with a request for  a trial.

The inspector, whose last names are Ramirez Ramirez, is not under precautionary measures since the case is only under initial investigation.

Although the complaint is under investigation and concrete facts can not be revealed, the crime of extortion is when a public official abuses his position and charges money to perform a task or “favor” that is part of his role.

According to Article 355 of the penal code, the punishment for this action is imprisonment for two to eight years.

Inspector with a Record

This is the second time that a complaint has been filed against Ramirez accusing him of extortion since a judicial proceeding was opened against the inspector in April of 2014 under file number 14-000423-800-PE.

At that time, Ramirez was removed from his position as a precautionary measure, but these measures were lifted by the criminal court on July 2, 2014.

According to Ana Estela Gutierrez, chief inspector of the Municipality of Santa Cruz, Ramirez continues to work there because they are waiting for the case to be decided.

“The position of the municipality in this investigation is of absolute objectivity and impartiality, which is why we will be paying attention to what is decided in the courts. It is true that the official whose last names are Ramirez Ramirez is working because at this time there is no injunction that prevents him from performing his duties within this municipality,” Gutierrez wrote in an email.

Both the mayor, Jorge Chavarria, and Gutierrez denied having been informed of the complaint filed in March. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments