A change of direction

 

 The E-mail response to our recent EBS message entitled "What Now" has been voluminous.  It has also revealed an unexpectedly positive and creative mindset on the part of those of you who have taken the time to write to us.  The letters have been thoughtfully composed and with virtually no expression of futility.

 The majority of your recommendations about the strategy changes to be considered at this time are quite rational and reasonable.  We know that not all of you who have written are attorneys, but the analytical character of the letters we have received would suggest otherwise. We are most grateful for your participation and your offers of support.

 Many of the proposals you have made have been under study since before we learned of the Supreme Court's decision.  We are investigating all of the options to see which may be the most feasible and promising, in the sense of their likelihood of success in recovering our investments in the shortest time possible.

 The options fall into two general categories.  First of a judicial nature, a lawsuit filed by and on the behalf of investors.  This would be focused on the violations of our civil rights and possibly be directed at governmental agencies and/or individuals.  If channeled through the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, it would bring international attention to our plight and place pressure upon the Costa Rican government.  However, this could take years to run its course - without any assurance that the CR government would comply with any compensation that might be awarded to investors.

 Other possible legal alternatives await the examination of the full resolution of the Supreme Court.  Normally this document is made public within five working days from the time the Court announces its verdict, but has not yet been released. The attorneys need to know the basis for the Court's decisions before deciding whether there is merit in filing a "Recurso de Revision" (in short, an appeal of the appeal). This would have to be based upon very specific errors made by the Appeals Court and would seek to overturn its opinion. It is the only remaining legal remedy available to Osvaldo.  However, our experience thus far has led us to mistrust the Costa Rican legal system, to put it mildly.  Therefore, we believe this option is of dubious benefit to investors who have already been waiting for six years for justice to be served.

 The second option would be to promote a settlement reached by negotiation between LEV and the Fiscalia.  This would require the cooperation of the Attorney General, and a willingness on the part of Enrique to accept some compromises so he may initiate the payback of his creditors and attain the release of his brother.  In light of the string of negative judicial decisions, we believe it would provide an opportunity for Enrique to fulfill his commitments and validate his stated intentions.

 We believe that the Canadian arbitration procedure (Jack Cain, et al) is nearing the hearing stage.  The three-judge panel has now been appointed and is scheduled for the first time June 27th.  The CR government has budgeted $2,900,000 for its legal defense.  If the government were to face another lawsuit having similar international significance, there could be much more incentive to negotiate an agreement that would avoid further expense and possible embarrassment. We are committed to the further exploration of  this approach.

 In conclusion, we recognize that the basic strategy we followed for nearly six years was flawed because of our assumption that the legal system in Costa Rica was capable of acting rationally and fairly in the prosecution of this case from beginning to end.  We are now obliged to change our strategy.  The one constant, however, is our belief that our best - and possibly only - chance to recover our money, is to obtain it from Luis Enrique Villalobos.

 Thank you.

 

 

Grupo UCCR
www.ticostuff.com/uccr
uccr@ticostuff.com