Explainer: Ecuador’s “Triple A” case (ongoing)

First, a quick clarification because the name causes constant confusion: the “Caso Triple A” (fuel case) is not the “Plan Triple AAA” drinking-water project in Portoviejo. They’re unrelated topics that happen to share a similar nickname. (Fiscalía General del Estado)

ENGLISH

What is it?

The “Caso Triple A” is a criminal case led by Fiscalía General del Estado investigating alleged illegal storage/transport/commercialization/distribution of petroleum-derived products—in plain terms, a suspected scheme to divert and sell subsidized fuel improperly, creating an alleged loss to the State. (Fiscalía General del Estado)

Who is involved?

Prosecution / investigators: Fiscalía General del Estado (the state prosecutor). (Fiscalía General del Estado)
Regulator / complainant / technical accuser: ARCH (hydrocarbons regulation and control agency). ARCH says it initiated the case via a complaint and has defended its technical theory publicly. (Fiscalía General del Estado)
State oil company as accuser: Petroecuador appears in reporting as an acusador particular alongside ARCH. (Primicias)
Defendants / processed parties: Reporting says the case includes 22 people/entities (notably including Aquiles Álvarez, Mayor of Guayaquil, plus companies and individuals linked to fuel commercialization). (El Universo)

Where is it happening?

The alleged conduct centers on fuel commercialization and distribution networks (stations and marketers), with reporting referencing activity tied to the northern border context and the broader fuel supply chain. (Primicias)
Procedurally, the trial hearing is scheduled in Quito, at the Complejo Judicial Norte (El Universo even specifies room 208 and time). (El Universo)

When did it start, and what’s the current status?

Start: Fiscalía’s official case page says the investigation began based on a complaint from the regulation agency, describing large discrepancies between fuel volumes dispatched and billed. (Fiscalía General del Estado)
2025 developments: Reporting describes ongoing procedural steps (including precautionary measures such as freezing assets and the use of electronic monitoring for Álvarez). (Primicias)
Now (still ongoing): The case is moving to the trial phase. Coverage says the trial hearing was moved up and is set for December 24, 2025, and that Fiscalía plans to present 110+ witnesses and experts, with ARCH and Petroecuador acting as private accusers. (Primicias)

What exactly is alleged?

The public allegations (as reported) focus on subsidized fuels and the idea that subsidized products intended for certain uses (e.g., vehicle diesel) were allegedly sold or diverted in ways that shouldn’t receive the subsidy—creating illegal profit and an alleged state loss. One report summarizes the accusation as subsidized diesel being sold for uses that do not carry the subsidy (e.g., industrial use), which would generate improper margins. (www.ecuavisa.com)
Separately, Fiscalía’s description emphasizes dispatch-vs-billing discrepancies (fuel that appears to have moved versus what was invoiced). (Fiscalía General del Estado)

How would a scheme like this work (mechanically), based on what has been reported?

Reported descriptions point to a paper + control problem:

Fuel moves through stations and marketers (commercializadoras + affiliated gas stations).
Investigators/regulators flag unusual patterns—like volumes exceeding storage capacity, mismatches between what is dispatched and what is billed, or atypical buyer profiles. (Fiscalía General del Estado)
ARCH’s argument (as reported) is also about responsibility: it says marketers are paid a margin not to be passive middlemen, but to control/audit their station networks. In recent reporting, ARCH claims contracts required the marketers linked to Álvarez to control and verify what happened inside their affiliated station network—an allegation Álvarez disputes. (Primicias)
Evidence then becomes invoices, contracts, fuel movement records, and financial traces—and that’s why Fiscalía says it will rely on a large list of witnesses/peritos at trial. (El Universo)

Why is this important news?

Public finances: Ecuador’s fuel subsidies are a major fiscal and political issue; diversion of subsidized fuel (if proven) would mean direct loss to the State and distortion of the subsidy’s purpose. (Fiscalía General del Estado)
Rule-of-law & institutions: This case tests how ARCH, Petroecuador, and Fiscalía handle complex, technical allegations involving regulated markets and powerful actors. (Primicias)
Political impact: The involvement of a sitting Guayaquil mayor makes it politically explosive and guarantees sustained national attention through trial and rulings. (Primicias)
Precedent: The outcome could reshape how Ecuador defines the legal duties of fuel marketers over their affiliated station networks (compliance, auditing, and liability). (Primicias)

What is not confirmed (yet)?

Everything above is allegation/prosecution vs defense until the court rules. The key “not confirmed” items are: final criminal responsibility, the final calculation of damages, and the court’s determination of whether marketers truly had the legal/contractual control duty ARCH claims (and whether that duty was breached). (Primicias)

ESPAÑOL

¿Qué es?

El “Caso Triple A” es un proceso penal en el que la Fiscalía General del Estado investiga una presunta comercialización/distribución ilegal de combustibles (derivados de petróleo), con posible perjuicio económico al Estado, asociado al manejo de combustible subsidiado. (Fiscalía General del Estado)

¿Quiénes están involucrados?

Fiscalía (investiga y acusa). (Fiscalía General del Estado)
ARCH (regulador; denuncia inicial y sustento técnico, según su versión). (Fiscalía General del Estado)
Petroecuador (reportado como acusador particular junto con ARCH). (Primicias)
Procesados: reportes hablan de 22 personas/entidades, incluyendo al alcalde de Guayaquil, Aquiles Álvarez, además de empresas vinculadas al negocio de comercialización de combustibles. (El Universo)

¿Dónde?

La conducta investigada se vincula a redes de comercialización y estaciones, con menciones al contexto de frontera norte en reportes previos. (Primicias)
El juicio está convocado en Quito, en el Complejo Judicial Norte. (El Universo)

¿Cuándo y en qué etapa está?

Inicio: la Fiscalía indica que la investigación parte de una denuncia del regulador, por “diferencias considerables” entre lo despachado y lo facturado. (Fiscalía General del Estado)
Sigue en curso: se reportan medidas y pasos procesales durante 2025 (congelamiento de valores y vigilancia electrónica, entre otros). (Primicias)
Etapa actual: la causa avanza a juzgamiento; la audiencia está fijada para el 24 de diciembre de 2025, y la Fiscalía prevé 110+ testigos y peritos, con ARCH y Petroecuador como acusadores particulares. (Primicias)

¿Qué se alega?

La tesis difundida en medios gira alrededor del subsidio: que combustible subsidiado se habría desviado y vendido para usos que no reciben subsidio, generando ganancias indebidas y perjuicio estatal. (www.ecuavisa.com)
Además, la Fiscalía habla de inconsistencias entre volúmenes despachados y facturados, que apuntan a irregularidades en la cadena. (Fiscalía General del Estado)

¿Cómo habría funcionado (según lo reportado)?

El combustible se mueve por comercializadoras y su red afiliada de estaciones.
Se detectan patrones anómalos (despacho vs facturación; contratos; trazas financieras). (Fiscalía General del Estado)
ARCH sostiene que las comercializadoras no son “intermediarias pasivas” y que sus contratos las obligaban a controlar/auditar lo que pasaba en su red; Álvarez lo niega. (Primicias)
Por eso el juicio se apoya en peritajes, documentación y numerosos testigos. (El Universo)

¿Por qué es importante?

Porque toca subsidios, fiscalidad, regulación y confianza institucional; y porque involucra a una figura política de primer nivel (alcalde de Guayaquil), lo que mantiene el caso en la agenda. (Fiscalía General del Estado)