The Chamber confirms the file of the complaint for documentary falsity but keeps the revelation alive
MADRID, 27 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Criminal Chamber of the National High Court (AN) has corrected the judge in the ‘Villarejo case’ and has ordered him to send to the Bilbao Courts the expansion of the complaint filed by Iberdrola against its former director of Control of Corporate Functions José Antonio del Olmo for the crimes of disclosure of secrets and disclosure of reserved data of a legal person.
In an order this Thursday, to which Europa Press has had access, the magistrates of the Third Section confirm the file dictated by Judge Manuel García Castellón for the former director but partially revoke one of the decisions contained in that same order. Specifically, the inadmissibility of the extension of the aforementioned complaint filed by the energy company.
It was last July when the head of the Central Court of Instruction Number 6 agreed to the dismissal for Del Olmo due to the prescription of the criminal liability that Iberdrola attributed to him in the complaint filed with the Bilbao Courts and which was later added to this separate piece. of ‘Tandem’.
The energy company filed a lawsuit against its former director for the report prepared by Del Olmo in December 2004 where it would reflect alleged irregularities and record several invoices, including one issued by CENYT, the Villarejo business group. The company maintained that it was a false ‘dossier’ and later, in its extension, it also accused Del Olmo of obtaining and disseminating internal documentation.
That same month of July, the magistrate refused to admit the expansion of the complaint filed by Iberdrola, explaining that it was “inappropriate since the infractions reported on the basis of an interpretation in accordance with” the ‘whistleblower’ directive were atypical “and, in addition, the violations denounced” in the complaint.
In that resolution, the magistrate affirmed that it was not “possible to know if Mr. Del Olmo could have been behind the news that is indicated in the complaint, since those who wrote them are within their right not to reveal their sources.” “In short, it can be concluded that there are no indications, beyond the vague suspicion that allow Mr. Del Olmo to be accused of disclosures or transfers of reserved data from Iberdrola in social media,” he argued.
In addition, García Castellón justified the file by explaining that the crime of falsehood in a private document that Iberdrola attributed to Del Olmo “in the initial complaint would be prescribed, and it had been since the filing of the complaint before the Bilbao Courts” at the beginning of 2020.
Now, the Chamber urges the instructor of the ‘Tándem’ macro-cause to “send testimony of the letter of extension of the complaint to the Dean Investigating Court of those competent objectively and territorially”, and that would be those of Bilbao, “to know of the attributed to the defendant and allegedly occurred in 2019”.
The magistrates consider that Judge García Castellón “cannot enter into assessing the dismissal agreed in the appealed order regarding the events of 2019, the object of the extension of the complaint due to lack of objective jurisdiction” of the National Court.
And it is that, according to the Chamber’s criteria, “the competence of the Central Investigating Court to hear some events, supposedly occurred in 2004, attributed to José Antonio del Olmo Ruiz, which would be much earlier and totally unrelated to the alleged crime, is questionable.” of bribery investigated” in this piece of the ‘Villarejo case’.
The Chamber concludes by assuring that “it is not possible to assess in this case the connection, analogy or relationship between the crimes to which it refers, to allow its investigation and prosecution in the same case.” “Nor are there legal reasons to attribute the jurisdiction for the investigation of these facts to the Central Court of Instruction,” he adds.
