Courts

Ábalos refuses to testify before the Supreme Court, and the Prosecutor's Office does not request his imprisonment.

The former Minister of Transport claimed "lack of defense" due to the judge's refusal to accept the last-minute change of lawyer.

Former Transport Minister José Luis Ábalos upon his arrival at the Supreme Court to testify for the fourth time
3 min

MadridJosé Luis Ábalos appeared before the Supreme Court for the fourth time this Wednesday and, unlike on previous occasions, refused to testify. Legal sources present at the hearing explained that the former Minister of Transport justified his decision by saying he felt "helpless" due to the fact that he had to attend with the lawyer he had resigned from two days earlier and had to prepare alone for the appointment. Ábalos entered the high court uncertain whether he would end up in pretrial detention after appearing before the investigating judge in the alleged corruption case, Leopoldo Puente. In a brief hearing, the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office did not request the precautionary measure requested by almost all of the Popular Party (PP) prosecutors. The PP lawyer, who represented them vigorously in court, requested pretrial detention without bail, and if the investigating judge wants to set bail, he proposed setting it at €650,000.

In an order issued the day before the summons, Puente had warned Ábalos that after his statement, a brief hearing would be held to assess the possibility of applying the same precautionary measure that, so far, has only been imposed on the former number three of the PSOE, Santos Cerdán. Until now, the former Minister of Transport has always left the high court free, since the investigating judge had considered it sufficient to withdraw his passport and force him to appear in court every two weeks. If he had not chosen to invoke his right not to testify, Ábalos would have faced questions about the latest report from the Central Operative Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard, which accuses him of having spent 95,000 euros of allegedly opaque origin and through his former advisor, Koldo García, in personal expenses. The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office admitted that after this report, the evidence against Ábalos worsened, but nevertheless saw no reason to change the precautionary measures applied until now and send him to prison.

The former minister arrived alone at the Supreme Court at 9:15 a.m., that is, three-quarters of an hour before the summons. He was not accompanied by lawyer José Anibal Álvarez, whom he was forced to retain as his lawyer despite having resigned from his services. Puente rejected the last-minute change on Tuesday - Ábalos informed the Supreme Court of his resignation from his lawyer less than two days before the statement and requested a public defender less than 24 hours before - because He considered it a "legal fraud"According to the judge, the decision to go without a lawyer and urgently request a public defender was an attempt to force the suspension of the statement due to the risk of imprisonment. At the beginning of the appearance, Ábalos confronted the judge and replied that what would have been "fraud" was his resignation as a deputy, as his lawyer had advised him to do, so that he would no longer be protected and thus send the case to the National Court. This difference of opinion is one of the reasons Ábalos gave for breaking with Anibal Álvarez.

If this scenario of imprisonment ultimately occurs, it would entail the suspension of Ábalos as a deputy—he would stop receiving a salary and lose the ability to vote while incarcerated—although the former minister would not have his seat revoked, thus opening the door to a worsening of the plurinational aggravation.

On the same day that Ábalos is summoned to appear before the Supreme Court, the People's Party (PP) has activated the machinery in the Senate, where it has an absolute majority, with the appearance before the commission investigating the Koldo (or Ábalos or Cerdán) case of Carmen Pano, the businesswoman who claimed to have handed 90,000 euros to Aldama, also under investigation. The PP said they had "high expectations" regarding what Pano might say, but the businesswoman also declined to testify, although she confirmed what she said as a witness to the Supreme Court about the delivery of cash to Ferraz.

stats