He points out that Beltrán Gutiérrez was the one who managed the money and that the former presidents could have “known” his maneuvers
Former Madrid councilor Francisco Granados has asked the judge of the National High Court (AN) who is investigating the alleged existence of a ‘box b’ in the Madrid PP with which the 2007, 2008 and 2011 elections would have been financed to revoke his prosecution for this piece number 9 of ‘Púnica’, assuring that his role as campaign director was “merely testimonial”, for which he believes that he should be exonerated like his superiors, former presidents Esperanza Aguirre and Ignacio González.
In a 115-page appeal for reform, to which Europa Press has had access, Granados asks the head of the Central Court of Instruction Number 6, Manuel García Castellón, to correct his decision of last Friday, with which he was prosecuted — along with seven other people– at the same time that the judicial investigation was filed for another 71, including Aguirre and González.
Granados affirms that the electoral crime charged against him for the 2011 elections is time-barred, as are those related to those of 2007 and 2008, two ballots in respect of which the instructor already appreciated that the eventual criminal responsibility had been extinguished by the elapsed time (more than three years). According to the reasoning of the defense, the terms began to run in September 2011 and he was not informed of these charges until December 2016.
The defense also combats the prosecution of Granados for alleged crimes of influence peddling and bribery, estimating that it is “a generic accusation.”
“All this regardless of maintaining, at all times, the innocence of my representative who has always acted according to law, as it could not be otherwise, in relation to the position he held in said merely testimonial and political period”, affirms his lawyer in the letter.
He maintains that, as campaign director, he was “outside of any economic management or possibility of mediating in these aspects with suppliers, donors, and third parties who could hold any position in the PP or in the aforementioned campaign”, which –alleges — “makes the commission of any illicit impossible”.
In this sense, he points out that the judge confuses the functions of the campaign director with those of the electoral administrator, at that time Beltrán Gutiérrez -another of the eight defendants-, “who is the one who effectively manages everything that could be related to economic aspects in payments, contracts, etc”.
“Even the campaign manager is unable to discredit, control and contradict the electoral administrator, being the ordinary organs of the party only and exclusively those that can protect Mr. Beltrán’s role as appointed administrator,” he details.
AGUIRRE AND GONZÁLEZ, THE “GREATEST INTERESTED”
In this context, the lawyer sees a “contradiction” in the fact that the judge files for “the majority of those investigated, including those who, due to rank in the party and in the elections themselves, are much higher than my defendant, based on to the position they held, and who are the ones who really and for those same circumstances could have managed or known to enter within their powers”.
At this point, he recalls that the secretary general of the PP in Madrid in November 2011 was González, “who was also elected as ‘number one’ on the list in that campaign and president, at the same time, of the electoral committee, as well as vice president of the Government and person who controlled, due to his interest in said campaign, all the acts derived from it, together with the president of the party”, Aguirre.
For this reason, he emphasizes, it seems to them “a contradiction” to prosecute “someone who functionally and by organization chart lacks the power and competence to manage the prosecution’s thesis, especially when those mentioned are the ones who have said competence and perform said functions, together with the aforementioned electoral administrator, Mr. Beltrán”.
He also draws attention to the fact that Aguirre and González were “the two most interested in winning those elections”, for being the president and vice president. “And it just so happens that they are the beneficiaries dismissed as people of higher rank,” she stresses.
“HE WAS NO LONGER A TRUSTWORTHY PERSON”
It also adds that “it is an uncontroversial, objective and notorious fact” that Granados “was dismissed from all the positions he held within the party and on the Government and Community Council precisely that year and after those elections” in 2011.
In his opinion, this shows that Granados “was no longer a trusted person” but that “they kept him as campaign manager to avoid bad thoughts from third parties that could lead to loss of votes or loss of elections.”
“The function that they preserved as campaign manager was testimonial, decorative or merely on screen to avoid rumors, dimes and diretes or political speculations that could be used by the opposition party, and that were breathed in the environment before the elections. political and media of the Government”, indicates.
“What serious participation and in the exercise of management and all that it means could be attributed to Mr. Granados when by his superiors they already knew that he was ousted and beheaded, by President Esperanza Aguirre and Vice President Nacho González,” he stresses. .
For Granados, “the only indication” that he would have intervened in “economic issues” in the 2011 electoral campaign “are certain notes” in his notebook, but he adds that those same notes have not been used against others investigated at the time who finally have been exonerated, among which he mentions the businessman Javier López Madrid.
“Furthermore, with respect to the entries in this agenda, a complete response was given that they had nothing to do with the alleged financing, economic funds or collaboration in relation to the party and that, in addition, they responded to actions of a political nature that it had in the rallies”, he adds, to complete: “Therefore, what indication is there that they were donations, that they referred to amounts of money, donors, on what dates? We already anticipated it, none”.
THE “MAIN ARTIST”
However, it disfigures García Castellón who uses “the same criteria in a contradictory way” that leads him to file the case for Aguirre, González or the former Madrid councilor Lucía Figar while he is pushed towards trial. “Why is the argument used for Mrs. Aguirre or Mr. González of ignorance of how these jobs were hired and paid not valid for Mr. Granados?” He questions, referring to jobs with an ‘online’ reputation.
Granados’ defense slips that his prosecution is only due to the fact that he has been profiled as “the main artist since 2014 in what has been called the ‘Punic’ plot in all his witnessed pieces, which could well be projected in a prolonged sequence of different chapters or sessions by how it begins, develops or could end”.
Along the same lines, he takes the opportunity to reproach that “Granados preventively served almost three years in prison for an economic embezzlement that the Public Prosecutor’s Office maintained ad nauseam and without any proof, no more and no less, for 700 million euros, so that he then barely makes a year this amount is modified to five million euros in the assets of the person under investigation, which even includes his hereditary part”.
The lawyer refers to the set of ‘Púnica’ –a macro-cause made up of a dozen separate pieces– as a “totum revolutum” where Granados has been accused of “each and every one of the possible criminal acts contained in our Penal Code “.
