The president of the Central Court of Instruction number 2 of the National Court, Ismael Moreno, closed the door this Wednesday by calling the Minister of Transport, Óscar Puente, to testify in the Koldo case, just as he rejected his predecessor in this position, José Luis Ábalos, accept the case to act as an injured party.
In the case of Puente, the statement had been requested by the popular accusation led by the Liberum association with the idea that it would explain the audit carried out in his ministry on the mask contracts that were the subject of the investigation, the same that the judge demanded and that is already added to the summary. The instructor rules out this step, but “without prejudice to the fact that in view of the statements of the witnesses and the statements under investigation that have been agreed in this procedure, it is relevant.”
What he reasons in a resolution that ABC has had access to is that at present it is not appropriate. “Given that Óscar Puente, at the date of the events that are the subject of these documents, was mayor of Valladolid and his relationship with the events is limited to ordering, as current head of the Ministry of Transport and Sustainable Mobility, the carrying out of an audit on the process of awarding by State Ports and ADIF of the contracts instructed”, he emphasizes.
As for Ábalos, he had provided expertise to question the legitimacy of the Puente audit and asked to appear as an injured party because he was concerned about its conclusions, which place him at the top of a whole series of irregularities in these contracts for which Puertos del Estado paid 20 million euros and Adif, another 12 million, for the purchase of masks from a company that a year earlier had charged zero euros.
Being mentioned is not being hurt
The judge considers that even if this audit, as Ábalos claims, “focuses directly on his actions”, to acquire the status of injured party in a case, “a higher premium must be demanded than that of simply being affected by the facts that are the subject of the investigation” or because of a certain diligence that has been carried out, as is the case in this instance.
“The aforementioned audit report cannot be considered as a circumstance that accompanies or arises from the commission of the crimes under investigation, it is another piece of evidence that must be evaluated in order to determine the reality of the crimes and the persons who may be responsible for them. and this cannot in any case give rise to harm to the person on the part of the one mentioned therein or because of discrepancies with its content,” he emphasizes.
He adds that although the legislation allows the appearance of people “whether or not they are offended by the crime”, it cannot be understood “as an authorization to allow the appearance in a procedure of all those people who, in one way or another, may be affected by the investigations”, so in line with what Anti-Corruption had said on the subject, he decides that it is not appropriate for Ábalos to be harmed in the Koldo case.
