Zapatero's false friend follows Aldama's steps
When the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in the Koldo case, at the end of June, in which it sentenced former minister and former organization secretary of the PSOE José Luis Ábalos and his advisor Koldo García to heavy prison sentences but benefited the main beneficiary of the mask fraud, Víctor de Aldama, alarm bells already began to ring. The suspension of the four-and-a-half-year prison sentence for the corrupter, replaced by community service, was justified by the businessman's cooperation in uncovering the fraud, which, according to the court, had been crucial in proving the accusations. However, this reward for the corrupter in exchange for denouncing his partners was controversial, firstly because not everyone saw it as justified within the same legal framework, and secondly because it was interpreted as a green light for others to follow the same path. This is precisely what seems to be starting to happen.
The businessman Julio Martínez Martínez, the alleged frontman for José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, is already following in Aldama's footsteps and has changed his defense strategy in a forceful way. The day before declaring, he sent a letter to the National Court in which he assures that the former Spanish president was the one leading his company and deciding "the steps to follow" in the consultancies they carried out for various companies, including the investigated Plus Ultra. Martínez Martínez states that the airline paid for the consultancy and also paid 1% of the amount of the 53 million euro bailout it received from the state thanks to the management carried out by Zapatero. The businessman assures that he was merely an intermediary because the one who had the contacts and influence was the former Spanish president, who had also been at the origin of the creation of the company Análisis Relevante, through which the consultancy work carried out by Zapatero was managed.
All of this represents a significant plot twist in this case. So far, Zapatero, who we recall maintains the unconditional support of the Sánchez government, insists on his innocence regarding the accusations of influence peddling and assures that everything will be clarified soon. In a video addressed to citizens, he asked for patience and stated that his innocence would soon be revealed, and a month ago, before the National Court judge José Luis Calama, who is handling the case, he literally said that he had not exercised "the slightest influence" in the public bailout of Plus Ultra. Now, his supposed friend – with whom he often went running and with whom he founded the consultancy firm – has betrayed him by stating the complete opposite and assuring that all responsibility lies with him. It will be necessary to see if in this case he will be able to provide enough documentary and all kinds of evidence that truly corroborate everything he says.
The debate over whether the figure of the repentant – a figure that has nothing to do with corruption whistleblowers, as in these cases they are involved in the case – is fundamental in the fight against corruption, as defended by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office and the Supreme Court, or if it can be the beginning of a witch hunt in which a person shoots indiscriminately to gain benefits and avoid paying for their guilt, is once again on the table. In any case, what is certain is that a statement is not enough: in this case and in all others, clear evidence is needed to justify the benefits for the repentant and to firmly underpin any guilty verdict.
