Although he considers questionable how it has been processed, he maintains that the judge has already acted and that the appeal has been left “without content”
MADRID, 17 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Provincial Court of Madrid has agreed with former Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy in considering that the Investigating Court Number 32 of Madrid should have upheld his brief against the rogatory commission issued by Andorra as a result of the complaint about ‘Operation Catalonia’ in which is listed as investigated. He has specified, however, that he cannot admit his complaint because the judge has already acted and responded to the Principality, for which he endorses the judicial assistance provided to the Andorran authorities.
In three cases, to which Europa Press has had access, the magistrates have also agreed with the former Minister of the Interior Jorge Fernández Díaz and the former Minister of Finance Cristóbal Montoro, but they have been forced to reject the appeals they presented because they already has processed the rogatory commission.
The three ex-charges of the Executive had requested that their appeal be upheld against the decision of the head of the Investigating Court Number 32 of Madrid not to admit the briefs they presented against the judicial assistance issued by Andorra on May 20 in which the three, in addition to the former Secretary of State Francisco Martínez, the former Director General of the Police Ignacio Cosidó and the former police commanders Eugenio Pino and Bonifacio Díez.
It should be remembered that the Justice of the Principality is investigating Rajoy, Fernández Díaz and Montoro for alleged crimes of coercion, threats, blackmail, extortion, coercion of constitutional bodies and the creation of a false document for their alleged relationship with attempts to learn “through illegal means” secret banking information of the former presidents of the Generalitat Jordi Pujol and Artur Mas, as well as former vice president Oriol Junqueras.
Specifically, the facts denounced in the complaints are related to alleged extortion, coercion and blackmail since 2014 by agents of the National Police to those responsible for the Banca Privada d’Andorra (BPA) to obtain “through illegal means” bank information secret protected by Andorran legislation” of various rulers of Catalonia and their relatives, including Pujol, Mas and Junqueras.
The defenses of Rajoy, Fernández Díaz and Montoro argued that their rights were violated because the Investigating Court 32 of Madrid, when processing the aforementioned request, did not carry out the “prior control of legality in accordance with national and conventional legislation regarding international cooperation”.
Last September, the Prosecutor’s Office requested that Rajoy’s appeal be upheld, considering that his “right to defense and constitutional principles” had been violated by processing a rogatory commission sent by the Andorran authorities for the complaint being investigated in Andorra.
Now, the magistrates of the Provincial Court of Madrid have agreed with the former senior government officials, but have specified that the complaint resource “has in practice been left without content, since the required judicial assistance has already been completed” .
The magistrates have indicated that the judge’s decision to process the rogatory commission was “susceptible” of being “questioned” by whoever could be affected and that, therefore, it was appealable. Thus, they have concluded that the resources of Rajoy, Fernández Díaz and Montero should have “been admitted”.
However, the Second Section of the Madrid Court has explained that, at the point where the procedure is, it would no longer be possible to revoke the judge’s decision in which it is agreed to carry out “a diligence already carried out and exhausted” .
As they have indicated, on July 14, the actions carried out by Police officials to comply with the rogatory commission were added to the procedure. In addition, they have stressed that “there is in the digital file” of the court an ordering procedure of July 20 in which it is said that “the warrant has been returned to the Andorran Judicial Authorities.”
Thus, the magistrates have insisted that the appeal of the former charges has been “without content”, for which they have stressed that what is appropriate is to inadmit them. Although they have considered questionable how Andorra’s judicial assistance has been processed, they have preferred not to paralyze the procedure.
