The former president of the Diputación de León denounces an investigation “like a saw tooth, with comings and goings”
MADRID, 10 Nov. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Prosecutor’s Office has criticized that those accused of the alleged online reputation work that the ‘Punic’ plot would have carried out in León have tried to hinder the start of the trial that started this Thursday at the National Court with the introduction of a series of previous issues in which they denounce alleged violations of rights.
“It gives us the feeling that the defenses are trying to keep us from going to trial,” said the prosecutor Carmen García Cerdá, who, together with her colleague from the Public Ministry, María Teresa Gálvez, has been in charge of responding to all the complaints made by the lawyers throughout the four hours that this oral hearing has lasted, which is expected to last, at least, until the beginning of December.
One of the issues that has received the most attention has been the request made by the lawyer of the alleged successor of ‘Púnica’, Alejandro de Pedro, who has urged that his defendant’s statement be made at the end of the trial, just after evidence has been presented in plenary.
That request, to which most of the lawyers have adhered, has been supported by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which has not objected to anything in this regard. However, the court has announced that it will not make a decision until next Monday, when the oral hearing resumes, a date on which it will also answer the rest of the previous questions.
It should be remembered that this possibility, that of allowing the defendants to intervene at the end of the trial, has recently been applied in the oral hearing that is also taking place in the National High Court against the semi-public company DEFEX and its former commercial director for alleged irregular contracts in Cameroon. .
Another of the complaints that has also been unanimous among the lawyers has been that the Prosecutor’s Office has provided, coinciding with the start of the trial, a series of documentation corresponding to other pieces of the ‘Punic’ macro-cause to which the rest of the lawyers do not have access.
The prosecutors, for their part, have assured that they have “tried to ensure that the documentation, testimonials and reports” dictated were incorporated into the main piece “to avoid defenselessness.” “As a first premise, all the defenses that are here have had and have access to that main piece,” they have argued, defending that the Prosecutor’s Office “has been very careful so that all parties can access the information.”
On the other hand, the defense of the former president of the Diputación de León Martín Marcos Martínez –who faces a request for 8 years in prison, the highest sentence requested– has invoked an alleged violation of the right to effective judicial protection that would have occurred throughout the investigation, which was directed by the Central Court of Instruction Number 6.
In this regard, his lawyer has criticized that the content of the intervened devices was not transferred to De Pedro and to the companies that would have allegedly carried out the reputation work: Eico Online and Madiva Editorial. “This did not happen like that with the Prosecutor’s Office, which had at its disposal at all times the content of all the issues dealt with in the investigation, which has meant the breach of the principle of equality of arms,” ??he argued.
But, in addition, Marcos’ defense has pointed out an alleged “violation of the right of defense by the very way” in which the investigation was conducted. “It is not a linear instruction, but as a saw tooth with comings and goings. Requests are made by the parties that remain unresolved and without being resolved, the judge moves on to the next phase,” he said.
For his part, De Pedro’s lawyer – for whom the Prosecutor’s Office is requesting 5 and a half years in prison – has alleged an alleged violation of the right to a trial without undue delay, recalling that the case began in 2014. “In 2016 we had go to abbreviated procedure, in 2018 the indictment of the Prosecutor’s Office and the order to open an oral trial. And here we are, in November 2022, “he lamented.
The Public Ministry, however, has affirmed that if the future of this separate piece of ‘Púnica’ has been delayed, it has been for “reason or because of the enormous amount of resources” that the parties would have presented.
De Pedro’s own lawyer, who also represents the aforementioned Eico and Madiva, has stressed that there has also been a violation of the accusatory principle insofar as the fact attributed to it has not been contained in the indictment story. to the two legal persons. “Or, if they are considered to be instrumental companies, a resolution would have to be pronounced on their incompetability or insanctionability,” he added.
The lawyer for Pedro Vicente Sánchez, who was coordinator of the press office of the Diputación and is now mayor of Puebla de Lillo with an independent party, has pointed out an alleged violation of the right to effective judicial protection, pointing out that in the order of transformation of the judge included new imputation facts when that first writ was already firm.
In addition, he has proposed the provision of a series of documentation in which it would be proven that the aforementioned position of coordinator of the press office from which he would have committed the crimes for which he is asked for seven years in prison never existed. “The supposed concert of my client because he was the right hand of the presidents of the Provincial Council, which we believe is not the case,” he added.
Regarding these allegations, the Prosecutor’s Office has pointed out that in complex procedures, as is the case, it is necessary “to go to trial to provide evidence and for the court to become aware” of whether or not the previously invoked violations have occurred . “Only by listening to the accused and the witnesses can it be resolved,” one of the prosecutors has argued.
In this first session, the lawyer of the former mayor of Cartagena José Antonio Alonso Conesa — who faces five and a half years in prison — has requested to provide a series of documentary evidence, among which are some invoices that would prove what the billing was he made with the companies with which he worked.
According to the account of the Prosecutor’s Office, both De Pedro and Conesa himself had worked since 2010 for different public administrations and together controlled a group of companies with which they applied for public contracts, “many of them with simulated objects.”
