Argimon wanted to continue vaccinating police officers "for logistics", but saw "no conflict" in limiting it to older ones

BarcelonaThe former Minister of Health, Josep Maria Argimon, testified early in the trial for the COVID vaccination of national police and civil guards stationed in Catalonia. The then director of the Catalan Health Institute and Secretary of Public Health assured that the decision to limit the AstraZeneca vaccine to the 60 to 65 age group – whether or not they were essential workers – was a decision of the Interterritorial Health Council and "did not pose any ethical conflict" nor in the epidemiological field, because it prioritized people most vulnerable to the virus. Nevertheless, he was in favor of continuing to vaccinate all officers, because the logistics were already in place, and he communicated this to the minister Alba Vergés.

Argimon recalled that on March 23rd, he was on a video conference with the then Secretary of Public Health, Carmen Cabezas, when she received a message from an advisor to minister Alba Vergés suggesting the possibility of postponing the vaccination of officers from these corps. At that time, it was already on hold, because serious side effects had been detected with the AstraZeneca vaccine, but it could finally continue to be used. "We replied that the vaccination was arranged, all vaccines were distributed, and that logistically it was in our interest to continue," explained Argimon. Furthermore, he said that organizing the vaccination of police and civil guards had an added complexity, because the doses were not administered in health centers, but in their police stations, and changing plans meant re-transporting all the vials to other locations.

He also recalled that he commented with Cabezas that they needed to have this order in writing, and asked that someone of higher hierarchy communicate it. In fact, they sent their comments on the decision to Vergés and the Secretary General of Health, Marc Ramentol, in which they showed agreement with prioritizing vaccination by age "but resuming essential groups that had been left pending". However, he insisted that they were only comments and that he did not have the power to decide: "In other emails, I had already told Xavier Rodríguez [director of services] 'You guys do and decide'. "

He says it was not his responsibility

During his statement, Argimon also clarified that it was neither his nor Cabezas' responsibility to organize the vaccination of essential workers, but Ramentol's (also accused in the trial). Nor was it their responsibility to coordinate with the police forces or other groups of essential workers. Furthermore, he stated that he did not follow the day-to-day organization of the vaccination, but delegated it to Cabezas: "The decision that Dr. Cabezas made was my decision".

Argimon, Vergés, Ramentol, and Rodríguez face twelve years of disqualification for prevarication. The plan was for them all to testify on Friday, but once the latest witness statements were concluded, the judge offered the option to bring forward the accused's testimony, and Argimon accepted. He answered questions from his lawyer, Olga Tubau, from the rest of the defense, and from the prosecutor, but not from the popular accusations representing police associations. They are accused because they allegedly "discriminated" against state police officers, when, on the other hand, the percentage of vaccinated Mossos d'Esquadra was much higher.

This Tuesday's witnesses agreed that it was a good decision to set age criteria given the shortage of doses. An advisor to the European Commission and the Department of Health during the pandemic recalled that international organizations "absolutely" recommended prioritizing the 60 to 69 age groups, and a doctor who participated in advisory committees in Catalonia assured that if older people had been vaccinated more, "the number of hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths would have been reduced more and sooner." Finally, a police officer who was involved in the investigation explained that there were factors that delayed vaccination, such as a batch of vaccines arriving in poor condition and that "meetings were dragging on" and there were doubts about the census of officers and the location where they would receive the vaccines.