ERE Case of Andalusia: The PP asks to go to European justice to avoid “impunity” of socialist corruption

This is how this party collects it, which Exercises popular accusation in the macrocousa Criminal of the ERE, in a letter of allegations that last week registered before the First Section of the Provincial Court of Seville.

In the document, which ABC has accessed, the three lawyers representing PP Andaluz They ask the Court to go before the Court of Justice of the European Union (TJUE) To raise three preliminary issues. They ask that the ten sentences issued by the CT in the so -called political piece or of the specific procedure of aid of the ERE case be “inappropriate” for which almost twenty high positions of the Junta de Andalucía under the Andalusia under the Andalusia under the Socialist mandates because these resolutions are “incompatible” with community law and their own norms of combat against corruption. They are two of the main arguments – there are more – collected in a 32 -page brief that appeals to other sentences issued by the TJUE that cancel decisions of constitutional courts of European countries contrary to European legislation.

The PP wants, in this way, Activate a consultation procedure before the maximum judicial instance of the EU before the Court of the Hearing of Seville issues its final sentences adjusting to the new doctrine imposed by the body of guarantees presided by the former attorney general of the Cándido Conde-Pumpid state.

Previously, the Clean Manos Union, which also exercises the accusation in the ERE case, raised a preliminary ruling in which it questioned the independence of the Magistrates of the TC that have annulled Crimes of prevarication and embezzlement in the ERE case. The Seville audience transferred the union’s request to the parties to pronounce on their origin or not to go to European justice.

The accusation exercised by the Andalusian PP, represented by lawyer Alfonso Martínez Escribano, considers Clean hands writing omit or develop “insufficiently” different questionable aspects of the corrective that the TC made to the sentence of the Seville Court in the ERE case, later ratified by the Supreme Court.

The PP proposes three ways to “put aside” resolutions Adopted by the TC. In the end, it is the audience of Seville that has the jurisdictional capacity to raise the question before the European final instance.

The first prejudicial issue that the PP raises is that the Constitutional «was overreach in the exercise of its powers to the detriment of the judicial authorities, in the greatest cause of political corruption in the country, in which it applied an exceptional interpretation about the sense of law to criminal legality, preventing these sentences with the effective application of the Law of the European Union ».

PP requests

Starting from this premise, the PP proposes that “the judgments of the interpretive constitutional court of the autonomic legal norms (budget laws from 2002 to 2009) in order to comply, lead to the behaviors of the accused as lawful when, according to The national ordinary courts, these norms did not exclude the criminal typification of these behaviors ».

The TC eliminated crimes of prevarication and embezzlement Attributed to the former political leaders of the Junta de Andalucía under the argument that the laws of regional budgets, between 2002 and 2009, expressly provided for the granting of socio -labor aid and companies in crisis of the 31L program through a mechanism called financing transfers which prevented the final destination of public money. Although the use of this system involves “the suppression of controls and procedures”, how to comply with the General Law of Subsidies, the execution of the program cannot lead to a criminal conviction for embezzlement, according to the TC.

For the PP, This doctrine “can be considered contrary to the right of the EU”. «The instance sentences (Seville Court) and Cassation (Supreme Court) are clear when considering that there is an absolute correspondence between the budgeting system approved by the Budget Laws and the consequent Global System of Management of Public Funds without subjection to the regime Of the subsidies, rejecting, in various passages, that one and the other can be disconnected, since they are successive links in the materialization of an original illegality, ”the writing rebates. This also exposed it four magistrates of the conservative wing of the TC issued private votes against the revision of the ERE case.

In this regard, the PP writing mentions, among others, The discrepant vote of Judge César Tolosa Tribiñowho warned that “the TC replaces the Supreme Court – and does so for the first time in its history – in the interpretation and application of the objective part of a crime, in this case of prevarication and stands in the supreme interpreter of the concepts of ‘resolution’ and ‘administrative matter’ ».

For The PP is “striking” that is in the “most serious case of corruption Institutionalized and maintained policy for more than ten years »where the TC« rectifies for the first time since it began its journey to the Supreme Court in the interpretation of an element collected in the description of the typical conduct of a crime ». All this sows “legitimate doubts” respect for the principles of “independence and impartiality” of the aforementioned organ.

The second preliminary ruling that the PP asks to bring to European justice in the previous one. Yeah It is left “apart from all control” Everything that “has to do with the budget activity”, from the elaboration of the accounts to the execution of the expense, “with this is unprotected the indemnity of public heritage, the proper functioning of the state’s patrimonial activity, the confidence of the Company in the honest management of public funds, the duties of fidelity and transparency that public officials have whose position are the assets of the public administration, ”reasons the brief of allegations.

The TC doctrine in the ERE casein the opinion of this popular accusation, «fails the international demands for the fight against political corruption, being incompatible with the provisions of article 325.1 of the Treaty of Operation of the European Union, of fighting fraud and against all illegal activity that affects to the financial interests of the Union, to prevent and combat corruption in general and provide for the application of effective and deterrent sanctions in case such infractions occur ».

In his allegations elevated to the audience of Seville, The PP quotes jurisprudence of the TJUE which cancels resolutions that row against the fight against fraud. «It is part of the European system also the recognition and respect of the fundamental rights, including that of criminal legality and the presumption of innocence, but the national standard for protection cannot fully generate spaces of impunity in the fight against The crimes of corruption, ”says the lawyers of the PP.

Specifically, They cite the judgment of the TJUE of October 21, 2021 (Eurobox Promotion Case) that gave a Romanian national judge to apply concrete sentences of their Constitutional Court that forced the repetition of the prosecution of certain public positions convicted of corruption.

“Difficult to reconcile the decision of the sentences”

«It is difficult to reconcile the decision of the censored sentences, which leads to the dessert to leave unpunished behaviors of special gravity committed by concrete political leaders in the performance of their public functions, with the effort of the European Union to eliminate margins of impunity For embezzlement. In precise legal terms, these censored sentences are not in accordance with the right of the EU in the field of the fight against corruption ».

The third and last issue Prejudicial on which the European justice would have to pronounce if, this is agreed by the Sevillian court that must process it, it would be that the community regulations and jurisprudence, which start from the general principle of the incompatibility of the aid and the duty of transparency or Advertising and information to the European Commission, «oppose the Andalusian Budget Laws of the years 2002 to 2009, as interpreted by the Constitutional Court, since they would breach the indicated norms related to the so -called State Aid by suppressing and unable to transparency and necessary procedures so that the European Union could develop its powers to control state aids that can affect the market unit and free competition ».

This last principle Nor is it compatible with a de facto ‘or’ de Iure suppression of the controls and the procedure of granting subsidies that are sustained in the Andalusian laws, according to the doctrine of the TC », concludes the writing of the PP. In fact, the judges who dictated the convictions to Chaves and Griñán indicated that the aid system was implemented to make fun of the repairs that the Board’s auditors put to the first aid contrary to European regulations granted to Cárnicas Molina in 1999 .