The Supreme Court prosecutor’s office decided not to appeal the sentence which acquitted the former president of the Valencian generality Francisco Camps for the last part of the Gürtel affair, opened according to the criteria announced by the anti-corruption prosecutor’s office.
Tax sources informed the agency Efe that the decision, the arguments of which have not yet been revealed and which represents a change compared to the position announced by Fight against corruptionin favor of an appeal to quash the acquittal.
Anti-corruption announced in October its intention to appeal the sentence handed down last May by the National Court, in which it exempted from any criminal responsibility the former leader of the Valencian PP, for which it requested a year in prison and six years of forfeiture for influence peddling in the face of prevarication.
He also announced an appeal against the popular accusation brought by two former regional socialist deputies. Whether the trial is still pending or already closed will depend on this appeal, whose deadline is set for this Tuesday, as Camps’ defense declared to EL ESPAÑOL. The group announced that it would present it.
Alongside Camps, three of his former ministers were acquitted –Alicia deMiguel, Manuel Cervera And Luis Rosado-, several former senior officials like David Serra either Salvadora Ibars and officials charged in connection with various contracts awarded to the company Orange Market between 2004 and 2009, including hiring by the Open Tennis or the Major events of the Valencian Generalitat at the tourism fair Fitur.
“No intervention”
The court effectively imposed up to two years and three months in prison on those considered to be the ringleaders of the plot –Francisco Correa, Pablo Crespo and Álvaro Pérez, the Bigotes-, who have been in prison for years, and also punished the eight other defendants who admitted the facts by accepting the sentences agreed with the prosecution with different sentences.
In its 232-page judgment, the Chamber affirmed Camps’ “zero intervention” in the Fitur 2009 fair contracts because there was no “proof or indication of collusion” with Dora Ibars, then director general of the Institutional Promotion, as the accusations allege. .
It is not proven – said the court – that the former regional president “exercised any pressure, suggestion, recommendation or insinuation” on Ibars, nor is there any “testimony, writing or communication between both”, which “eliminates any evidence or indication of any “criminal” importance.
