The PSOE senator says that the order of the Supreme Court causes him “uneasiness and mistrust” and he wonders if there are “two different penal codes”
SANTA CRUZ DE TENERIFE, March 9 (EUROPA PRESS) –
The PSOE senator and councilor for Urban Planning of the La Laguna City Council, Santiago Pérez, has branded this Friday as “incomprehensible” the file of the cause of the ‘Reparos case’ that affects the senator of CC Fernando Clavijo and believes that this increases the ” mistrust” in the Spanish judicial leadership.
In a statement sent to the media, he also said that the appraisals are a “degradation” of the constitutional order and an effective derogation of fundamental constitutional principles such as equality before the law.
Along these lines, he states that the appraisal allows the investigated person to “choose” the court that is going to investigate him and the
who is going to judge him, “and they choose high courts, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, and not the judges that make up the ordinary justice system.”
Pérez highlights that the Council of State endorsed the appraisal in 2016 “when acts that the appraised are investigated
has carried out in the exercise of his position” but he understands that “it is a scandal and a derogation of fundamental constitutional principles that public officials from all over the country who are being
investigated for indicatively criminal actions in the exercise of their position as mayors register, become senators or deputies, to choose the court that will judge them
investigate and who is going to judge them”.
Along these lines, he acknowledges that the car from the file causes him “uneasiness and mistrust.”
The socialist senator –complainant of the case– understands that it is “hardly understandable” that “serious” judicial and corruption matters of “conservative world personalities” are excluded, pointing out that “it is almost inexplicable” the ex-minister María Dolores de Cospedal has left out of the ‘Kitchen case’.
It also points out that “the same high judicial bodies display a whole creative and imaginative jurisprudence in a field as delicate as that of criminal law”, giving as an example that in the ‘ERE case’, in the opinion of the dissenting magistrates and authorities in Criminal Law like Quintero Olivares, “criminal figures of the Criminal Code are applied analogically and extensively that the very guarantees of citizenship should prevent and prohibit.”
In some cases, he details, “they replace actual evidence with suppositions, and on that basis they support prosecutions and convictions.”
Regarding the ‘Reparos case’, it indicates that a “highly argued” report from the investigating judge and a brief of more than one hundred pages from the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, which has led this investigation since it requested in 2019, was sent to the Supreme Court. to intervene in the face of the inhibition of the Ordinary Prosecutor’s Office for a year and a half when it comes to promoting the judicial proceedings to investigate this matter.
According to Pérez, the ‘Reparos case’ “is extraordinarily serious and has basically consisted of the de facto repeal of the laws relating to public sector contracting in the municipality of La Laguna and the creation, in the words of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor , a protected market”.
A “MONOPOLY REGIME” OPERATED IN LA LAGUNA
The mayor comments that a “monopoly regime” was activated for certain companies in such a way that “the right of equality and free competition in contracting to other companies and citizens was prevented for years” and that the City Council itself selected the best offer in quality and price.
By virtue of the file of the case, Pérez wonders if there are “two different penal codes”, one that applies ordinary justice to the
citizenship and another that high judicial bodies apply to the taxpayers.
“It is as if we were going back to the pre-contemporary age, prior to the liberal revolutions, when society was a class society in which each class had its legal status and its judges,” he points out.
In fact, it puts on the table the “comparative grievance” that means that the former mayor of San Juan de La Rambla, Fidela Velázquez, has been disqualified for more than 8 years “for paying 3,000 euros to a mediator of a property expropriated by the City Council or 4,000 euros in bonuses to officials outside the legal procedure”.
In the ‘Reparos case’, Pérez continues, the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office points to “hundreds of decrees, some of them compromising outside the law and paying millions in amounts”, which makes him think “in exchange for what”.
However, it announces that it will present an appeal before the High Court in compliance with the legal duty imposed on public officials and officials by article 262 of the Criminal Procedure Law.
