The judge in the Zapatero case indicts his daughters and his secretary

MadridMajor move by José Luis Calama. The judge investigating José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero takes another step and indicts his two daughters –Alba Rodríguez and Laura Rodríguez– and his secretary –Gertrudis Alcázar– after the PP requested it, as leader of the popular prosecutions, pointing to the crimes of criminal organization, influence peddling and money laundering. It was an initial request from Hazte Oír that the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office endorsed. The two daughters are administrators of What The Fav and, according to the magistrate, the communication company's operations "appear linked" to the structure under suspicion. "The investigation attributes to her an instrumental role in the channeling, concealment or facilitation of operations relevant to the facts object of the procedure," he argues. The UDEF argued that she had a role of "operational coordination" and "channel for logistical and documentary support" of the alleged influence peddling scheme. The judge's decision comes the day after Zapatero's statement, in which he defended his daughters, alleging that they had a company that worked doing layout tasks. The judge, on the other hand, rejects indicting José Luis Ábalos and Koldo García.

In the ruling, the judge argues that citing them as investigated parties is "the only compatible way" with the right to effective judicial protection and is "necessary" to "preserve" their fundamental rights. Why? Summoning them as witnesses would generate a "risk" and would be "incompatible" with their "potentially affected procedural position", given that the obligation to tell the truth would "irreversibly" compromise their right not to testify against themselves and not to confess guilt. "The judicial body must avoid any action that may place a person in a situation of forced self-incrimination, especially when there is a reasonable possibility that their procedural status may evolve towards indictment," he justifies.

For the moment, the PP avoids touching the subject: "I will not make a fuss about something that has to do with something as sacred as the personal environment. It will be heavy enough for Zapatero to have gotten his daughters into this mess," said the Popular Party spokesperson, Borja Sémper, minutes after the news broke. For their part, in the corridors of Congress, PSOE sources downplay it: they say it was "predictable" and refer back to the statement from the former Spanish president, which "has tested" the socialist bases.

In the ruling that authorized entry into the company's headquarters, the judge stated that What The Fav received funds from clients of the influence network and from the structure itself, organized in a kind of "circular fund circuit" and that it operated as a "redistribution center" for economic flows, "channeling payments" to Zapatero and his inner circle. He maintained that it was an "artificial" structure that generated invoicing ad hoc to "provide formal cover" for financial movements without real economic activity: "It does not develop ordinary business activity, but rather acts as an instrumental vehicle," he summarized.

What were the payments? What The Fav received 561,400 euros from Inteligencia Prospectiva, 239,755 euros from Análisis Relevante, 171,727 euros from Gate Center, and 12,297 euros from Thinking Heads Group. In its brief, to which ARA has had access, the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office indicated that What The Fav is the recipient of "significant" sums of money and that Zapatero's daughters received "substantial income" – 247,000 euros for one and 200,000 euros for the other – which have "little correlation" with those registered with the Tax Agency, which are significantly lower.

analyzed, it is inferred that she, along with Cristóbal Cano, exercised functions of "coordination, elaboration and formal coverage" of the documentation of the actions of the His secretary was an "essential operational piece"

To justify the imputation of Gertrudis Alcázar, the judge refers to the order that authorized the search of Zapatero's office where the jewels valued at 1.3 million euros were found. He defined her as an "essential operational piece within the organized network" and the "central node of communication and documentary management" because she used the Spanish ex-president's email account. From the analyzed emails, it is inferred that she, along with Cristóbal Cano, exercised functions of "coordination, elaboration, and formal coverage" of the documentation for the actions of the Finance Boutique. What she did was receive "direct instructions" to articulate the "documentary appearance" of the payments received and issued by the network to know which concepts to include, with what temporal periodicity, and what exact amounts.

Thus, for example, she asked if she should issue one or several invoices for an amount of 20,000 euros and requested instructions on the concepts: "It evidences a prior agreement on the content, description, and amount of the invoices, which reveals the absence of a real underlying service," the judge considered at that time. In a chain of emails, it was proposed to "reach an agreement on concepts" and at another point she consulted if she should increase the amounts. In the judge's opinion, this evidences a "modus operandi

–who was a counselor for Plus Ultra representing the main shareholder– that Refuses to request more information from the United States

Likewise, the judge closes the door to the request of Zapatero's lawyer to request more information from the United States about the obtaining of Rodolfo Reyes's mobile phone messages –who was a counselor of Plus Ultra representing the main shareholder– that a North American agency provided and which are key evidence against the former Spanish president. In the document, consulted by ARA, Víctor Moreno Catena expressed "reasonable doubts" about the "respect for the right to a fair trial" due to the "absence of complete data" on the seizure, download, and custody of the device.

The former president's defense made a series of requests to verify if the conversations "truly meet the requirements of authenticity, integrity, and legality" so that they can be considered valid. However, the judge closes the door to this pending a response from the United States: until it is received, he will not be able to make a "founded assessment" on the "necessity or appropriateness" of requesting more information.