The National Court requests a report from the Prosecutor’s Office before deciding whether to send the material to Andorra
MADRID, 7 Nov. (EUROPA PRESS) –
An investigating judge from Andorra has asked the National Court (AN) to send her the recordings of José Manuel Villarejo that appear in the macro-cause where his private businesses are analyzed, ‘Tándem’, to investigate whether the now retired commissioner received a commission de Higini and Ramón Cierco, former presidents of Banca Privada de Andorra (BPA).
Legal sources confirm to Europa Press that the Andorran petition has reached the Central Court of Instruction Number 6, the one in charge of investigating the ‘Villarejo case’. The same sources indicate that the Public Prosecutor’s Office has been notified so that it can rule on the matter before deciding whether to accept the request from the neighboring country.
It should be remembered that the Andorran Justice is investigating, on the other hand, the complaints filed against the former Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, the former Minister of the Interior Jorge Fernández Díaz and the former Minister of Finance Cristóbal Montoro for the so-called ‘Operation Catalonia’.
Specifically, alleged extortion, coercion and blackmail are being investigated by agents of the National Police since 2014 against those responsible for BPA in order to obtain “through illegal means” banking information of various rulers of Catalonia and their relatives, including former presidents Jordi Pujol and Artur Mas, and former Vice President Oriol Junqueras.
The Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) has given the green light to the rogatory commission issued by Andorra to notify Rajoy, Fernández Díaz and Montoro of their imputation for these complaints.
In this way, the TSJM agreed to lift the very precautionary measure that it had previously adopted to urgently suspend Andorra’s rogatory commission. Thus, after this decision, the Principality will receive the documentation required from Spain and will have the green light to proceed against those investigated.
However, the court explained that the fact of accepting the letter rogatory could not be confused with a prosecution on the merits of the process. The magistrates insisted that the judicial assistance serves to notify them that a procedure has been initiated and to “guarantee a situation of equality.”
