She questions that the former presidents were “unrelated” to advertising work and she has to be “prosecuted” for taking care of them
MADRID, 18 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
Isabel Gallego, who was the general director of the Media of the Community of Madrid with the Government of Esperanza Aguirre, has appealed her prosecution in the separate piece of the ‘Púnica’ plot about the alleged ‘box B’ of the regional PP, assuring that His work was supervised by superior positions that had “decisive capacity and necessary signature”, pointing specifically to Aguirre and also former Madrid president Ignacio González.
In a letter this Monday, collected by Europa Press, Gallego’s defense appeals the decision of the head of the Central Court of Instruction Number 6, Manuel García Castellón, who proposed to prosecute her along with seven other people for the alleged corruption with which the ‘ people’ of Madrid would have partially financed the elections of 2007, 2008 and 2011.
The former press officer of the former Madrid president considers “unfair, partial and discriminatory that the financing of the PP is pivoted on the journalist who was in charge of Media” of the Community of Madrid despite the fact that “she was never part of the People’s Party”.
And it is that, his lawyer points out, about Gallego “there were numerous organic positions with responsibility and supervision of his management and full knowledge of his work, to which the process is archived with unequal arguments: from career officials and auditors to presidents of the Community, passing through directors and managers of the branch with decisive capacity and necessary signature”.
Gallego’s representation, prosecuted for alleged crimes of prevarication, influence peddling and embezzlement, has thus referred to the judge’s decision to file the case for Aguirre herself and also for her successor in the Presidency of the Community of Madrid Ignatius Gonzalez.
In this regard, he recalls that the judge agreed to the dismissal for both despite the fact that “there are indications of embezzlement in the person who contracted the work that benefited them personally.” “To refute that conclusion, we are not going to delve into the fact that both were and are perfectly aware of the news that is published and that it was in their interest as presidents that their institutional image be improved. It is irrational to maintain the opposite,” he affirms.
The defense of the former directive points out that “the reasoning expressed by the judge is lacking that allows us to understand why the publicity carried out by” Gallego “about the presidents of the Community must be a crime.” Especially, he adds, “why these were unrelated to the issue and the journalist who managed it should be prosecuted.”
From his point of view, in addition to being contrary to the right to equality, this issue “jeopardizes the right to judicial protection by failing to reason why what is lawful for some, is criminal for Isabel Gallego.”
It was last Friday when the magistrate lifted the accusations that weighed on the former regional presidents Aguirre and González, leaving Francisco Granados, the alleged ringleader of the plot, at the top of the eight prosecuted for this separate piece number 9 of ‘Púnica’.
In her brief, the defense of the former Director General of the Media refers to two of the defendants –Alejandro de Pedro, alleged successor of the plot, and Borja Sarasola– to discharge the responsibility attributed to him by the magistrate.
“Whether or not there was a previous debt with the PP or its executive positions, if there was an agreement with Borja Sarasola or any other person prior to Alejandro de Pedro carrying out work for the CAM, it cannot be imputed to Isabel Gallego from any perspective of participation. , because beyond this allegation, there is no evidence or indication whatsoever that supports that she decided, knew or at least covered up, “he maintains.
Along these lines, the letter emphasizes that Gallego’s request for De Pedro to come to work was requested from the Governing Council through different personalities of the Community. “Thus, it was arranged that the service be contracted with the budgetary funds of the General Directorate of Media, which in no way can be considered foreign to the Ministry of the Presidency, the Technical Undersecretary General and, even, to the affected presidents themselves and, from then, neither Salvador Victoria nor Borja Sarasola”, he argues.
Thus, the lawyer makes it clear that it is not that Gallego proposed De Pedro, but that he was “imposed” after Sarasola’s recommendation. In her opinion, “it cannot be taken as good that Gallego herself is blamed for “what Francisco Granados, Esperanza Aguirre, Ignacio González or others agreed, if they did, with Alejandro de Pedro”, whether it was “legal or illegal.”
At this point, his defense indicates that throughout the investigation he “learned that numerous politicians and relevant personalities hired Alejandro de Pedro’s companies.” “If they acquired debts with them or agreed to pay them, it is completely foreign to Isabel Gallego’s performance,” he concludes.
