Last week, Peinado agreed to ask the La Caixa Foundation and the Reale insurance company for the grant applications for the funds with which they sponsored the extraordinary chair co-directed by Gómez at the Complutense University of Madrid. The UCM was asked for the list of students enrolled in each edition of the Competitive Social Transformation chair.
He also called a director of the Business Institute, a private entity, to testify. who hired Pedro Sánchez’s wife in 2018 to lead the IE Africa Center.
“He The investigator cannot investigate any fact without submitting it to a prior scope of what constitutes the object of the procedure,” the defender specifies in the appeal.
The law establishes an investigation in which the investigator “has the freedom to decide what investigative procedures are to be conducted, but gives him the power to accept these procedures only to the extent that he has a relationship or entity to investigate the facts that are the subject of the procedure, and no others.”
This delimitation is made in the order opening the preliminary proceedings, which, in this case, was revised by the Provincial Court of Madrid on May 29.
“The order of the Provincial Court is very clear in stating that, from the initial complaint of the Union of Civil Servants of Manos Cleans, there was only sufficient evidence regarding the contracts in which a series of subsidies were granted to the UTE formed by Innova Next SLU and the Valley Business School,” says the resource in reference to the companies of Juan Carlos Barrabés, for which Gómez wrote letters of recommendation in two competitions.
But the investigation into the contracts awarded to Barrabés was forwarded by Peinado himself to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, so, according to the defender, The procedure that Peinado orders “would be pointless.”
“If there is no subject of investigation, it is not possible for the instructor to accept the practice of any diligence,” the appeal adds. “Especially if we consider that, even if many documents were provided, especially for the personal accusations, and several witness statements were made, the truth is that these procedures have not added anything to the file. indicative insufficiency existing in the initial complaint, as interpreted by the Provincial Court of Madrid.”
“And regarding the investigations that the Court entrusted to the UCO of the Civil Guard, two in-depth reports have been presented in which there is no trace of irregularities in the facts investigated,” he adds.
The appeal also complains about the “Absolute lack of motivation” for new procedures agreed by the instructor, which, in his opinion, “have no relation to the subject of the investigation.
In this sense, it is worth noting that, although the Madrid court is about to rule on an appeal by the defense in which it questions the indeterminacy of the object of the trial, Peinado “hastily” accepts a new procedure “without waiting for the problem to be resolved by the Provincial Court” such a resource.”
“These are mere interested speculations, which have reasons unrelated to the case, and which should not be authorized by the Court, which must guarantee procedural guarantees and respect for our Constitution,” he concludes.
