The Madrid Provincial Prosecutor’s Office asked this Monday the magistrate of case 8-M, Carmen Rodríguez-Medel, to archive the open investigation against the Government delegate in the Community, José Manuel Franco, for allowing demonstrations to take place in the region during the coronavirus expansion phase —among others, the feminist march of 8 March-. The public prosecutor dismisses, in a resource sent to the Investigating Court 51 of the capital, the criminal responsibility of the representative of the Executive in a process that has revolutionized national policy in recent weeks, with attacks on La Moncloa for alleged interference after the Interior Ministry decided to dismiss Colonel Diego Pérez de los Cobos as a result of a report sent to the judge by civil guards under his command.
Throughout a 23-page brief, to which EL PAÍS has had access, the Prosecutor’s Office charges Rodríguez-Medel’s own initial decision to open the case on March 23, after receiving the complaint from a private attorney. The public ministry stresses that, after analyzing all the accusations made, Franco did not prevail. Neither active nor passive. What’s more, he reproaches the judge for charging him with this alleged crime for giving the green light to the mobilizations, but he does not specify “clearly” what resolution the government delegate issued “whose illegality must be assessed.” The Office of the Prosecutor believes that it is “obvious” that the mere fact of receiving communication about the future celebration of a demonstration does not imply that it may have committed prevarication: “Well, receiving communication does not mean issuing a resolution.
The prosecutor even recalls that this crime requires that the opinion issued “be not only unlawful, but also arbitrary.” And it specifies that the Government delegate, in addition to not signing any resolution to that effect, has also “not carried out any action or omission that violates the legal system in the interests of the prevalence of his exclusive personal will.” A line of argument that expands even further by ruling out that Franco, in order to allow the marches, should avoid resolving any resolution to which he was “legally bound”. The Public Prosecutor’s Office also recalls that the responsibilities in health matters corresponded to other authorities. “Therefore, it would not be reasonable to require the Government delegate to prohibit demonstrations for reasons of sanitary order when the powers in the field of public health, and specifically, for the adoption of preventive measures for epidemiological surveillance, corresponded to another body administrative “, stresses in his appeal.
With this document, the Office of the Public Prosecutor joins the State Attorney, who already requested the investigation file a few weeks ago, in a letter accusing the magistrate of opening a “general cause” against the authorities. The legal body dependent on the Executive added then that, until March 14, there was “no resolution of any competent authority in health, local, autonomous, or state, that limited the concentrations of people.” Therefore, Franco could not “prohibit the exercise of a fundamental right.”
No clues
In its letter made public this Monday, the public prosecutor also addresses another one derived from the judicial investigation: that the delegate in the Community of Madrid had received an order from the Government not to prevent the mobilizations. But, according to the Prosecutor’s Office, that thesis does not hold. It is not supported “by any circumstantial data”, stresses the appeal, where it is emphasized that, even after the investigations already carried out by the judge, no evidence has been found that points in that direction: “As it could hardly be otherwise , given the attribution of powers of the autonomous community until the declaration of the state of alarm dated March 14, 2020, ”the letter adds, pointing to the Government of Isabel Díaz Ayuso (PP).
Ultimately, the public prosecutor dismantles the thesis expressed by the Civil Guard in the reports that it sent to Judge Rodríguez-Medel, where it was stated that no concentration should have been allowed since March 5 and that the authorities knew the risks. . A document with errors, speculations and press clippings – to which the State Attorney’s Office has already responded, which it said was not supported by “scientific” data -, which the Prosecutor’s Office contradicts on Monday. “Pretending that the investigated person knew that, with a different action to that carried out, he could have prevented the death of thousands of people and the exponential contagion of the disease is practically implausible.”
Darts of the Public Ministry
The Prosecutor’s Office launches in its writing another dart to the magistrate, to which it attributes a certain “inconsistency” when opening a case against the Government delegate in Madrid and, instead, not forwarding the complaint to the rest of the communities so that investigations could be initiated in each of the autonomies. In fact, as the public ministry recalls, the lawyer who launched the case attacked all the Executive delegates. In other words: if the instructor finds signs of criminality [contra Franco]If the same indications were present against the rest, the correct thing would have been to inhibit each other. However, it could have happened that the territorially competent courts rejected the complaint outright, leading to the paradox that only the delegate of the Government of Madrid was charged with that initial complaint, ”the appeal states.
This is the first time that the Prosecutor General’s Office has spoken in this case, opened on March 23. The public prosecutor’s office considered from the beginning that the case had little legal track record, but has debated in recent weeks whether the best thing to do was to request the closure of the investigation or, instead, not oppose the declaration of Franco (quoted next Wednesday ) and the witnesses already summoned by the judge and reassess their position after those appearances. Finally, the Prosecutor’s Office has chosen to request the file now.
–
