On March 3, the oral trial began in Rio Gallegos concerning the sinking of the ARA San Juan submarine, which tragically occurred on November 15, 2017, resulting in the deaths of all 44 crew members. This trial is marked by the profound grief of the families affected, who are seeking the truth about the incident. The legal process emphasizes the necessity of grounding accusations in verifiable facts and technical evidence, rather than speculation or conjecture, underscoring the principle that a conviction lacking solid evidence is merely an addition to the existing tragedy rather than a pursuit of justice.

The focus of the trial is on Claudio Villamide, the former Commander of the Submarine Force of the Argentine Navy, who is accused of permitting the submarine to undertake navigation while unfit for duty. Villamide's defense argues that this accusation is both incorrect and unjust, asserting that it is crucial to rely on factual evidence in maritime operations, which are inherently complex and governed by stringent regulations. The defense contends that the prosecution's case rests on conjectural reasoning, which fails to meet the evidentiary standards necessary for a Guilty verdict.

Ultimately, the trial represents not only a quest for accountability for the ARA San Juan tragedy but also serves as a reminder of the responsibilities associated with naval operations and the importance of thorough investigative processes. As the proceedings unfold, all eyes will be on how the court navigates the fine line between conjecture and established evidence, underscoring the need for justice based on factual substantiation rather than assumptions or biases.