Requests that the former president and her successor Ignacio González respond as lucrative participants
MADRID, 11 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office has asked to sentence the former councilor of the Community of Madrid Francisco Granados to 7 years and 10 months in prison and the former manager of the Madrid PP Beltrán Gutiérrez to 3 years and 6 months in prison, considering that they are most responsible for the alleged ‘box b’ of the party at the regional level, also requesting the testimony of former president Esperanza Aguirre as a witness during the trial.
In its indictment, collected by Europa Press, the Public Ministry not only requests Aguirre’s testimony in the oral hearing, but also requests that both she and the former Madrid president Ignacio González be called as lucrative participants: Aguirre in the amount of 26,000 euros and González 28,293.22 euros.
The Prosecutor’s Office asks to condemn Aguirre’s former press chief, Isabel Gallego, the president’s former chief of staff, Borja Sarasola, the former director of the Community José Martínez Nicolás, the alleged ‘obtainer’ of Púnica, Alejandro de Pedro, and Diego Mora.
According to Anticorruption, Granados and Gutiérrez took advantage of their organic positions within the PP of Madrid – the first being general secretary and the second regional manager – “knowing that in May 2011 the autonomous elections corresponded to the Community of Madrid and that they were going to be appointed as campaign director and electoral administrator respectively.”
In this way, “they agreed to, in a similar way to previous campaigns, search, locate and deal with ‘related’ advertising companies to commission electoral acts that would be paid for outside of the regulated procedures in accordance with the regulations of the process.” electoral, as well as subsequently, hidden from the accounts chamber of the Community of Madrid”.
“Thus, Granados began to schedule the events from, at least, the beginning of September 2010 in such a way that, on November 8, 2010, he had already awarded the main material execution of the campaign to the company. The Almagro 36 Laboratory, S.L., as well as in agreement with its manager, María Luisa de Madariaga, carry out the same and how it should be billed by your company, as well as to which legal entity,” says the Prosecutor’s Office.
Finally, the letter recalls, the elections were called by Aguirre, opening “the so-called electoral period which, for economic purposes, involves the application of the electoral spending limits provided for, both in the General Electoral Organic Law and in the Electoral Law of the Madrid’s community”.
As already anticipated, Anticorrupción points out, the main person responsible for the electoral campaign was Granados, while the person in charge of the funds as campaign manager, as in the previous ones, was Beltrán, who was also appointed before the Provincial Electoral Board as electoral administrator.
The main organization chart of the campaign was in turn broken down into multiple people responsible for sectoral issues, among which the Prosecutor’s Office highlights the person responsible for local campaigns and public events, Borja Sarasola, and, as in the 2007 regional elections, the person responsible for the media, Isabel Gallego.
In its writing, the Prosecutor’s Office details a series of income and expenses and reports that, “in order to comply with the electoral regulations, Beltrán Gutiérrez, in his capacity as electoral administrator and with the knowledge of the also accused, director of the campaign, presented written before the registry of the Chamber of Accounts of Madrid on September 23, 2011, by which it presented the comprehensive documentation of the accounting of the electoral campaign of the aforementioned party, even knowing that the information presented did not respond to reality overall costs”.
And this was so, Anticorrupción points out, while “the total declared cost was 2,986,624*89 euros, with the official accounting information of the Popular Party of Madrid being sent as an attachment to the document on which such figure was based and justified.”
“According to it, a total of 35 suppliers were declared, while the invoices presented by them, the analytical accounting and their accounts, the daily book of operations and the means of payment, as well as the extract of movements of the campaign account,” the letter adds.
However, the Prosecutor’s Office explains, “this amount was much lower than what was actually incurred, since the accused authorized electoral expenses that were not declared to the Chamber of Accounts, nor were they paid through the campaign account, such that the accounting presented to the supervisory body did not respond to the reality of what happened.”
“In order to execute such a plan, it was necessary to have, as had been done in previous electoral periods, from the point of view of the service providers, like-minded businessmen who, by performing the service, would subsequently invoice it under other concepts and, from From the perspective of income and expenses, it became necessary, on the one hand, to use sources of fundraising, either opaque or by altering the declared destination and, on the other, to transfer those resources to the service providers, either in cash, either through altered invoices,” he says.
The Prosecutor’s Office argues that “the main irregular source of fundraising was through contributions of cash that were delivered, directly or indirectly, to Granados.” “Once delivered, he recorded the payments handwritten in a black notebook, after which he deducted from the amounts an amount that he retained for himself or for third parties outside the party and, the rest, he sent to Gutiérrez, who was in charge of making the cash payments that they did not wish to record before the Accounts Chamber,” he explains.
