The prosecutor in the Pujol case denies the influence of Operation Catalonia

San Fernando de HenaresThe patriotic police The issue has resurfaced in the trial of the Pujol Ferrusola family. While on Monday and Tuesday the defense lawyers denounced the "contamination" of Operation Catalonia at the very beginning of the case and the "original sin" of the investigation, the Public Prosecutor's Office and the State Attorney's Office sought to draw a line between the state's dirty tricks and the trial that began on Monday at the National Court. "No evidence has been manipulated for ulterior motives, and it has been obtained with full respect for the rights of the accused," asserted prosecutor Fernando Bermejo. He reprimanded the lawyers for stirring up "political rumors" and "unsubstantiated hypotheses" by turning them into grounds for annulment and for attempting to get the court to consider "alleged maneuvers and irregularities unrelated to the facts being judged." "Political issues cannot be introduced into a procedural, legal, and substantive matter such as the investigation and prosecution of crimes," he concluded.

At the end of his argument, he referred to a passage from the Supreme Court's judgment in the Trial trial to argue that it is a "mistake" to base oneself on a "contextual assumption that would explain everything" and to regret that the appeal to the patriotic police "It clouds the analysis" and transforms "legitimate actions of the State" into "repressive acts intended to subjugate a people." "What is not documented is unknown," he insisted. And he defended the fact that the Economic and Fiscal Crime Unit (UDEF) of the Spanish police "has always acted under judicial control," which "completely excludes any violation of the Constitution."

"No one forced her"

Fernando Bermejo also argued that the complaint filed by Vicky Álvarez—Jordi Pujol Ferrusola's ex-partner—in 2012—despite the prosecutor's claim that it was filed in 2010—provided "sufficient and concrete evidence," "prompted the investigation," and was "clear." "There is no prospective investigation," the prosecutor emphasized, highlighting that Vicky Álvarez's account was corroborated by the UDEF (Financial and Economic Crime Unit) and data from the Tax Agency. Furthermore, addressing the defense's complaints, he challenged them to prove that she was coerced: "Truly, no one forced her. If they disagree, let them prove it here in court."

Now, according to the defense, she was encouraged to speak after receiving a call from Villarejo, who, posing as a journalist, threatened to publish photos of her if she didn't testify. She was further incentivized by a text message from Jorge Moragas, Mariano Rajoy's chief of staff, telling her to "give it to him." In addition, Vicky Álvarez received payments from classified funds. On Monday, Oriol Pujol's lawyer, Francesc Sánchez, emphasized that it was "obvious" that her testimony was not "subject to her free will" and stressed that, in this case, Operation Catalonia is not "futile."

The famous front page of 'El Mundo'

In this context, prosecutor Fernando Bermejo has argued that the investigation "had begun" beforeThe WorldThe publication of the infamous front page with the screenshot of the Pujol family's accounts in Andorra has been cited. And it has been argued that, after this, Jordi Pujol published the statement "voluntarily and freely," precisely the same words used by Josep Pujol Ferrusola's lawyer, Jaime Campaner, to deny it. On behalf of the State Attorney's Office, José Ignacio Ocio argued that the journalistic information reached the case "untainted" and defended the dissemination of the banking information of the children of the former president of the Generalitat, which Campaner attributed to "state intervention" and dubbed a "strip," as "the legitimate exercise of the fundamental right to receive truthful information." He questioned whether it constituted a "revelation of secrets" and justified it by saying that the information was "so truthful" that it prompted Pujol's "baroque explanation" in the July 2014 statement.

He denies the statute of limitations for the crimes and the court's lack of jurisdiction

At the end of his 50-minute presentation, the prosecutor urged the court to reject all preliminary motions and defended the "full validity" of the entire investigation. Two of the main complaints from the defense concerned the National Court's lack of jurisdiction to try the case and the statute of limitations for the crimes. Fernando Bermejo denied both claims.

In the first instance, he argued that the "operations aimed at masking or concealing the criminal origin of the funds" were carried out outside of Spain: the alleged money laundering "began" within the country with the "decision to hide the money" through companies established in Spain, using "amounts generated by the illicit activity."

In the second case, he argued that the statute of limitations for document forgery begins to run when the document "has been effectively used" or "enters circulation," and that, regardless, it is a crime that was "instrumental" to money laundering and, therefore, cannot be treated in "isolation." "Whoever actively contributes to hindering the discovery of the crime cannot later invoke the statute of limitations generated during the time they themselves caused it," he justified regarding money laundering. And he insisted that the statute of limitations does not begin when "the operations begin," but when "the criminal activity ceases" or when "the crime is discovered." This argument greatly surprised the defense. The trial will resume on Wednesday, December 10, at which time the court will rule on the preliminary motions filed by all parties and will decide whether to accept any of them, reject them, or address them in the future judgment. The first witnesses are also scheduled to begin testifying.