The National Court is already investigating, for alleged pyramid fraud, the investment platform Madeira Invest, created by Álvaro Romillo, the cryptocurrency expert who revealed having sought opaque financing from the Court of Auditors for the MEP Alvise a Perez.
National Court Judge José Luis Calama agreed to handle three complaints filed against Madeira Invest and several of its directors.
In a resolution known this Friday, the president of the Central Instruction Court Four rejects the request of one of the accused to recuse himself from the Supreme Court to investigate the European deputy Luis Pérez Fernández, known as Alvise Pérez , because according to the doctrine the High Court must transmit a reasoned statement to investigate an accused when indications of responsibility appear.
Calama admits and accumulates, with a favorable report from the prosecutor’s office, the three complaints presented by Ances, the National Association for the Defense of Spanish Consumption of Services, the Association of Cryptocurrency Users and the Association of People Affected by investments in cryptocurrencies, the latter representing a group of affected people. These complaints are directed against Álvaro Romillo as head of the Madeira Invest Club group and against the legal entity Madeira Invest Club, among other managers and entities.
In his order, the judge indicates that once determined that the facts are likely to constitute fraud, without prejudice to the legal qualification carried out at the appropriate time of the procedure, it appears with “clear clarity” that they can constitute a crime of fraud. and this would be the responsibility of the National Court due to the number of victims and the amount of what was allegedly defrauded.
The judge underlines that the overall damage reported by the accusations would amount to more than 11 million euros, a figure which exceeds the bar of 7 million euros that the Supreme Court set as a parameter for granting jurisdiction to the Court national.
In addition, the instructor uses functionality criteria to conclude that the National Court is the most favorable judicial body to deal with the investigation.
In the present case, indicates the magistrate, it is a complex investigation, with a criminal network of multiple instrumental companies and international connections, with addresses in Portugal, the United States, the Dominican Republic, Estonia and in Albania, which will require resorting to the recurring issuance of international legal cooperation instruments for the purposes of determining the nature and circumstances of the events, the persons who participated in them, as well as for the location of financial assets.
The order states that documents included in the complaints and links to external information indicate that the number of people affected could reach 27,000 and that the damage caused to them could exceed 300 million euros, circumstances which place this judicial body in a favorable position from a functional point of view. point of view to undertake the investigation.
Alvise indictment
In the case of Alvise Pérez, the Association of Cryptocurrency Users expanded its initial complaint to ask the court to recuse itself in favor of the Supreme Court due to his status as an MEP and, therefore, a member of the Supreme Court.
In his writing, the judge explains that the said request cannot be processed without formulating the corresponding reasoned declaration in which he must give the reasons why he considers that the High Court has jurisdiction.
Calama recalls that the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court has clarified the procedural meaning of the referral of the reasoned declaration for knowledge of the criminal acts initially attributed to any authorized person. Thus, she emphasizes, “the reasoned statement which must be sent for the investigation of any accused will only be appropriate when indications of responsibility appear”.
The judge specifies that the purely nominal confirmation that a certain criminal act was attributed to an authorized person is not sufficient, but that “it must be sufficiently exhaustive to delimit, with all the provisional which is typical of a moment procedural such as the present, the objective and subjective scope of the facts.
The magistrate adds that Article 118 bis of the Criminal Procedure Law, introduced in Organic Law 7/2002, establishes that the accused must be informed of the admission of a complaint or complaint and of any action from which the imputation of a criminal offense results. . crime. The certified person can assume party status and voluntarily testify before the judge. “The power to become a party, to take cognizance of all acts and to obtain a copy of the said complaint or complaint, if applicable, is also expressly established; voluntarily testify before the judge, provide documents, offer evidence and participate in the evidentiary procedure,” he adds.
