Ex-Fiscal Calls for Investigation into Possible Bribery in Significant Reduction of Fine Against Julio Ponce Lerou

Original article: Fallo 3–2 y voto Vivanco: exfiscal Gajardo pide indagar “si hubo coimas” por brutal rebaja a Julio Ponce Lerou

The debate has reignited: a tweet from former prosecutor Carlos Gajardo has once again highlighted the controversial 2020 ruling of the Cascadas case, which saw a historic fine against Julio Ponce Lerou slashed from US$62 million to around US$3 million, decided by a narrow 3–2 margin in the Supreme Court.

In his message, Gajardo emphasized the significance of the fine reduction correlating with the close vote of 3–2 in the Third Chamber and pointed directly to the influence of Ángela Vivanco in this decision. He further asserted that this incident merits investigation.

In his post on X, Carlos Gajardo stated: «In 2020, the Supreme Court reduced the fine against Ponce Lerou from 62 to 3 million dollars. The decision was 3 to 2 with Vivanco’s vote. When the Supreme Court expelled Vivanco, it credited her with irregularities in various cases, including this one. There should be an investigation into whether there were bribes.»

En 2020 la CS rebajó multa a Ponce Lerou de 62 a 3 millones de dólares. El fallo fue 3 a 2 con el voto de Vivanco. Cuando la Suprema expulsa a Vivanco le acredita irregularidades en diversas causas entre ellas esa. Debe investigarse si hubo coimas.https://t.co/PduBTExE7e pic.twitter.com/id4cicelCY

— Carlos Gajardo Pinto (@cgajardop) January 31, 2026

The tweet has reopened the discussion, but the history of the fine reduction for Julio Ponce Lerou is longstanding, rooted in the core of the Cascadas case.

Fine Reduction for Ponce Lerou: The Origins of the «Cascadas Case»

The civil side of the Cascadas case dates back to 2014, when the then Superintendence of Securities and Insurance (SVS) sanctioned Ponce Lerou with a historic fine for violations related to stock market operations involving cascade companies. The penalty was affirmed initially and later confirmed in appeals; however, during this period, the fine amount began to be reduced, sparking a controversy that eventually reached the Supreme Court. In 2020, the highest court confirmed the violations, but the debate centered on whether to uphold the reduction made by the Court of Appeals.

In 2016, the 18th Civil Court of Santiago validated the penalty, and in 2019, the Court of Appeals of Santiago also confirmed the violations, but reduced the amount to 75,000 UF, «less than US$3 million.» This cut was linked to a 2018 Constitutional Court ruling that declared unconstitutional the regulation allowing fines of up to a third of the transaction amount in case of irregularities. This shift reframed the discussion from «what happened» to «how much should be fined.»

Fine Reduction for Ponce Lerou and the 3–2 Vote in the Supreme Court

In 2020, the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of Chile unanimously confirmed the violations, describing a scheme of coordinated transactions «in amount and time.» The division arose in the state’s appeal to annul the reduction imposed by the Court of Appeals. The majority—María Eugenia Sandoval, Ángela Vivanco, and associate judge Diego Munita—rejected the state’s request, asserting that the Constitutional Court’s ruling was binding. The minority—former Supreme Court President Sergio Muñoz and the associate judge Pedro Pierry—argued for maintaining the original fine, contending that Ponce did not timely challenge that unconstitutionality.

Today, Gajardo’s tweet brings back to the forefront the reduction of the fine against Ponce Lerou, the 3–2 vote, and the call to investigate «if there were bribes.» The debate resurfaces, especially in a context where Vivanco was detained by OS7 of Carabineros following an order from the Seventh Guarantee Court of Santiago after the Supreme Court admitted a complaint from the regional prosecutor of Los Lagos, Carmen Gloria Wittwer, concerning the «Bielorrussian scheme» investigating alleged judicial corruption crimes.