Calls to complete the test with the testimony of Francisco Martín and Miguel Gómez de Liaño and to justify the accusation against the former head of operations
SANTANDER, 17 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Provincial Court of Cantabria has annulled the court ruling that sentenced the former president of Sniace Blas Mezquita and the other six members of the Board of Directors of this Torrelavega company to three months and 15 days in prison for the polluting discharges into the Saja-Besaya river made between 2008 and 2010 without authorization.
A new sentence of the First Section of the Court, to which Europa Press has had access, partially estimates the appeals presented by those convicted at the time by the Criminal Court number two of Santander, annulling their ruling, which also imposed the same sentence of The then head of operations of the factory, Francisco González Payno, was imprisoned as the criminally responsible author of a crime against the environment, while the directors had committed it by omission.
Specifically, the Court considers the resources that allude to the lack of motivation and lack of some evidence, so that it partially annuls the trial and calls for a new sentence to be issued by the same magistrate who signed the previous resolution published in September 2021, Jose Hoya Coromina.
Specifically, the testimony of Francisco Martín, who was Minister of the Environment of the Government of Cantabria between 2008 and 2010, and the former Minister of Sniace, Miguel Gómez de Liaño, will have to be taken.
In addition, the Court urges to include in the new sentence that “a factually motivated decision” be issued in relation to the accusation directed against González Payno.
The Chamber focuses on the former director of operations because it considers that “there is not a single reference to the evidence assessed to declare the criminal responsibility of this appellant, who is the only one who was not part of the company’s board of directors and who, therefore, Therefore, it did not take part in the agreements of this one”.
The sentence of the Criminal Court number 2 of Santander pointed out that “it has been pointed out ad nauseam and it was verified in the plenary” that González Payno “had no competence to order the cessation of the activity and was aware of the polluting content of the discharges , but it could and should have warned of the consequences of continuing production and dumping”.
However, the Court does not find this “pointing out over and over again” and believes that the statement that “it was verified in plenary” should have been explained, since “no reference to the evidence has been found in the text of the judgment taken into account for this purpose”.
In addition to annulling the judgment of instance regarding González Payno, the Court focuses on the fact that the testimonies of Miguel Gómez de Liaño and Francisco Martín would still need to be practiced. With reference to the latter, he considers it “incorrect” that it was not admitted in the corresponding order and the witness was not summoned, something for which he protested at the beginning of the oral trial.
And in relation to Gómez de Liaño, it considers that “he is a person who was part of the board of directors and who can be presumed to have been aware of Sniace’s environmental situation, as evidenced by the fact that he had been prosecuted precisely for a crime such as the one charged in the present case and when there is no evidence that, on the date of the events hereby prosecuted, he had disassociated himself from the company”.
The Criminal Court sentenced the former directors of Sniace to a crime against the environment applying the highly qualified mitigating factor of undue delay -after six years of unjustified investigation-, to seven months of disqualification from carrying out any activity related to the emission of discharges into the natural environment and to indemnify the Cantabrian Hydrographic Confederation -dependent on the State-. In addition, the Sniace company was found liable for the civil consequences.
The prison sentence imposed by the magistrate was almost half of that requested by the prosecutor, who after the trial modified her conclusions and reduced her request from 16 to 6 months, as it was proven that there was a crime against natural resources and the environment. environment but not continuous, although permanent.
The representative of the public ministry attributed the material authorship of the illicit material to the former director of operations of the company known as Papelera del Besaya, as responsible for the decision to carry out the discharges, while she considered the then president and the other imputed directors guilty by omission , knowing the facts and not opposing or prohibiting them.
Ecologists in Action, who adhered to the proposals of the Prosecutor’s Office, and the State Attorney’s Office, which after the hearing requested two years and six months in jail for each person involved, a fine of 10,200 euros and disqualification for activities related to discharges for two years. In addition, this party claimed compensation of 49.8 million.
