Ruling clears members of the International Tabernacle Church
An Argentine court acquitted members of the International Tabernacle Church in a human trafficking case after concluding that prosecutors failed to present sufficient evidence and did not establish the existence of actual victims. The ruling brought an end to a lengthy investigation that had caused significant public exposure and personal harm to those accused.
The court found that the adults involved had joined and remained in the religious community voluntarily and that there was no proof of deception, coercion, deprivation of liberty, or exploitation — all essential elements required to establish the crime of human trafficking.
Judicial criticism of the investigation and expert reports
In its decision, the court sharply criticized how the investigation was conducted and how certain expert reports were used to support the charges. Judges stated that several conclusions were based on subjective interpretations, assumptions, or bias rather than verifiable facts.
The ruling emphasized that membership in a religious group with unconventional beliefs or practices cannot automatically be equated with exploitation or victimization. The court warned against criminalizing religious or cultural expressions through the misuse of serious criminal categories.
Role of the specialized anti-trafficking prosecution unit
The investigation involved the Procuraduría de Trata y Explotación de Personas (PROTEX), Argentina’s specialized anti-trafficking prosecution unit. While the ruling did not assign criminal liability to officials, it clearly questioned the prosecutorial approach and the manner in which alleged victims were identified.
The court stressed that combating human trafficking must not come at the expense of evidentiary standards or through an overly broad interpretation of crimes that carry severe legal and social consequences.
Religious freedom and limits of criminal law
The decision highlighted the need to protect freedom of belief, association, and religion, rights safeguarded by the Constitution and international treaties. Judges stated that criminal law should not be used to address ideological, cultural, or religious disagreements in the absence of concrete harm to fundamental rights.
The ruling also acknowledged the lasting damage such investigations can cause even when they end in acquittal, including public stigmatization, invasion of privacy, and irreversible reputational harm.
A precedent on the use of trafficking charges
Beyond the specific case, the judgment reopened debate over the expansive use of human trafficking laws and the risks of applying them without strict verification of their legal elements. The decision was widely seen as a warning about the need for rigor, caution, and respect for due-process guarantees in highly sensitive criminal investigations.
