The judge ignores the PP and Ábalos avoids jail.

MadridJosé Luis Ábalos will remain free to serve as a member of Congress despite the ongoing investigation by the Supreme Court. This is what the investigating judge in the alleged corruption case, Leopoldo Puente, has agreed upon following the fourth summons to the Supreme Court of the former Minister of Transport, who faced the threat of provisional imprisonment—the PP and seven other popular accusations requested this in a brief hearing this Wednesday. In the nine-page ruling in which Puente rejects toughening the precautionary measures applied to Ábalos, the judge states that despite the fact that the latest report from the Central Operative Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard—the reason for recalling him again—provides "very consistent" evidence against the former minister and increases the risk of imprisonment. Thus, the judge is inclined to follow the advice of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, which had advocated making no changes to the measures applied to Ábalos since February and maintaining the revocation of his passport and the requirement that he appear in court every two weeks.

The former Minister of Transport spent more than five hours in the Supreme Court—most of it waiting for Puente's decision because he refused to testify—and as soon as he was released, he addressed Congress. The judge spoke out in this regard, encouraging "reflection" on the advisability of the law allowing Ábalos to retain his seat. "This investigating judge is no stranger to the natural stupor that occurs when a person, faced with such strong evidence of the possible commission of very serious crimes, [...] can continue [...] simultaneously exercising the high functions that correspond to a member of Congress," says Puente, who emphasizes that he simply applies the rules that allow him. If the judge had sent him to prison, Ábalos would have been suspended as a deputy without the possibility of voting or collecting a salary. The judge argues that he could not order the provisional detention "with the (improper) purpose of satisfying the requirements arising from the current wording of the Congressional regulations that allow the suspension to occur."

Why did you decide to release him? According to the ruling, the risk of flight is "increasing" as the investigation progresses, but it is not yet "intensified enough." The Anti-Corruption Office had argued that his status as a parliamentarian and his ties to the state reduced the possibility of him trying to flee Spain. "To avert the present risk," Puente agrees, continuing with the current situation is "sufficient," although it opens the door to applying "more onerous" precautionary measures in the future. Koldo García, Ábalos's former advisor, is scheduled to appear before the Supreme Court this Thursday. Predictably, Puente and the Anti-Corruption Office will follow the same line as with the former minister, which would keep former PSOE number three Santos Cerdán as the only suspect in prison.

Has not declared

Unlike on previous occasions, Ábalos has refused to testify. Legal sources present at the hearing explained that the former Minister of Transport justified this by arguing that he felt "defenseless" because he was unable to prepare for it or attend with a trusted lawyer. The former minister arrived alone at the Supreme Court without lawyer José Aníbal Álvarez, who arrived fifteen minutes later. Ábalos has been forced to retain him as his lawyer for the time being despite having resigned from his services. Puente rejected the last-minute change on Tuesday—Ábalos informed the Supreme Court of his resignation 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 a "fraud" was that he had renounced his position as a deputy, as his lawyer had advised him to do so that he would no longer be a member of parliament and the case would be transferred to the National Court. This difference of opinion is one of the reasons that Ábalos gave for breaking with Aníbal Álvarez. If he had not chosen to invoke the right not to testify, Ábalos would have faced questions about the latest report from the Civil Guard, which accuses him of having spent 95,000 euros of allegedly opaque origin and through Koldo in personal expenses.

No reference to the PSOE

In the ruling, Puente makes no reference to the PSOE and focuses his account on Ábalos's "very significant" personal expenses, which provide "clear indications" of "illicit financial gains" allegedly obtained "in exchange for the improper awarding of public works contracts." The judge ignores the envelopes appearing in the report containing cash that the former PSOE minister received during the expense report. Puente makes no reference to hypothetical irregular financing by the Socialists and speaks only of the existence of evidence of "involvement in a criminal organization," "influence peddling," and "bribery," as well as the possibility of "considering the possible existence" of embezzlement of public funds.

However, on the same day that Ábalos was summoned to the Supreme Court, the PP activated the machinery to support the hypothesis that the PSOE's financing is suspicious both in the control session in Congress and in the Senate, where it has an absolute majority, with the appearance before the investigation committee of the Koldo case (or Á). He claimed to have delivered 90,000 euros to the PSOE headquarters on the orders of the commissioner Víctor de Aldama, also under investigation. The PP said they had "high expectations" about what Pano might say, but the businesswoman also did not want to testify, although she ratified what she said as a witness to the Supreme Court about the delivery of cash to Ferraz.