Abel Martínez denounces embargo of his personal accounts due to debts of the Cabildo de Santiago

Inocencio Encarnación
2 Min Read
Santiago. – The former mayor of Santiago and leader of the Dominican Liberation Party (PLD), Abel Martínez, denounced this Thursday that for a year his personal bank accounts have been embargoed due to debts attributed to the City Council of this city. Martínez described the measure as an “abuse,” considering that he is being held responsible for financial commitments that correspond to the municipal institution, despite the fact that he no longer holds that position. He explained that this situation has prevented him from carrying out financial transactions since September 2024.

You may be interested in: http://Guyana pushes the idea of selling its own crude oil

The former presidential candidate of the PLD pointed out that during his time as municipal executive he defended the resources of the council, which, according to him, places him in this situation today. “These are institutional debts, not personal ones, and yet my accounts are blocked,” he stated. On his side, lawyer Rafael Ceballos informed that they have formally requested the lifting of the embargoes, arguing that there is damage against the economic development of his client. “There are even claimants who have already been paid in the current municipal administration, which makes the irregularity of this situation even more evident,” he said. One of the mentioned cases corresponds to a debt of just 14 thousand pesos for an electrical repair, registered as non-payment in the administration of Martinez.

Meanwhile, the plaintiff, represented by lawyers Mayobanex Peña and Fernando Tavárez, questioned Martínez’s appearance and expressed its rejection of the lifting of the embargo, arguing that the process for him to pay the debt has been going on for several years.

The files are being heard in the Presidency of the Civil and Commercial Chamber of the judicial district of Santiago, which granted a period of three days to the parties to expand their conclusions, before leaving the case in a state of judgment.
Share This Article