The People's Party (PP) is putting the Montoro case behind them: "He's the one who should provide explanations."

MadridThe PP doesn't want the Montoro case to tarnish the party's current leadership, led by Alberto Núñez Feijóo, and they're trying to create a firewall to prevent its shadow, and therefore that of corruption, from sticking to them. To start with, they do so out of regret. "It's worrying," stated the PP spokesperson in the Congress of Deputies, Esther Muñoz, at a press conference on Monday morning. But they also do so by leaving the case as something of the past, so the one who should speak out is not the current leadership, but the courts, and above all Cristóbal Montoro himself: "The one who should give explanations for all of this is [Cristóbal] Montoro," indicated Muñoz.

Since the secrecy of the case was lifted, reports about the involvement of the former PP Finance Minister, Cristóbal Montoro, for allegedly having trafficked in laws from the ministry and having enriched themselves illicitly through front men They haven't stopped firing people. "In my party [the PP] there may have been colleagues who used it to enrich themselves, and that affects those of us who are honest," the Popular Party spokesperson argued.

On the other hand, within the Socialist ranks, a common denominator has been found between the current PP and the PP from the time when Montoro was Minister of Finance: the then Prime Minister of Spain, Mariano Rajoy. The figure of the person who recruited Montoro to form part of the central government between 2011 and 2018 has served the PSOE to lump Alberto Núñez Feijóo and Cristóbal Montoro together: "Feijóo is part of all this, he's from the same political core of Mariano Rajoy's government and he's defended it a thousand times," López affirmed in an interview on RNE. The spokesperson for the PSOE Federal Executive, Montse Mínguez, has gone even further, denouncing Feijóo's hiring of Alberto Nadal. The PP's newly appointed deputy economic secretary was Secretary of State for the Treasury when Montoro was a minister. "It was the PP leader himself who brought this past to the present," Mínguez denounced at a press conference on Monday.

PP sources maintain their confidence in Navidad and close ranks behind him. The same sources note that he is neither charged nor summoned as a witness in the Montoro case, and maintain that the idea of removing him is not on the table. Regarding the meeting between Rajoy and Feijóo this weekend, which was reported by some media outlets, Muñoz stated that he was "unaware" of any contact between the former Spanish president and the current leadership of the PP.

"What does Feijóo have to do with Montoro?" asked the former president of the Community of Madrid and former PP minister, Esperanza Aguirre, in an interview on Antena 3 this Monday, thus entering the race by the Popular Party to disassociate the names of Alberto Núñez Feijó. Aguirre also noted that Montoro "could give some explanation" and once again lamented the release of his tax information, which was always "perfect."

A PP "subscribed" to corruption

Likewise, within the Socialist party, they have no hesitation in leaving out the investigation opened by the Tarragona court. "[The Montoro case] is the PP in its purest form," asserted the Minister of Justice, the Presidency, and Parliamentary Relations, Félix Bolaños, this Monday, calling for justice to be allowed to work: "It should be the one to determine the facts, the seriousness, and the possible crimes that were committed."

In this regard, Óscar López recalled that the case involving the former Hisned minister is added to the Kitchen and Gürtel plots, which also target the PP. In fact, the trial for the second era of the Gürtel case (2006-2009) is scheduled to begin after the summer. "The PP is supporting a modus operandi of corruption," stated the Socialist minister, who maintained that the reaction of the Popular Party has been different from that of the PSOE with the Cerdán case, where he believes that they have acted with "swiftness and force" to eliminate those allegedly involved in corrupt schemes.

The PP, on the other hand, denies the majority opinion. "If I [Esther Muñoz] were Patxi López [PSOE spokesperson] today, I would come out and say that there is an investigation open against [Cristóbol] Montoro for being right-wing. That the judges are attacking the PP or that there is lawfare. Since the PP is involved, the left is fine with it, and so am I. When there are suspicions of corruption, they should be investigated until they lead, if necessary, to a conviction," asserted the PP spokesperson in Congress. Thus, Muñoz emphasized that if the socialist reactions to the Cerdán case, also known as the Ábalos or Koldo case, are taken into account, "it makes them difficult to respond to corruption.

Just the week in which the investigation against the former number 3 of the PSOE and part of the leadership of José Luis Ábalos's Ministry of Transport has two important appointments in both the Supreme Court and the National Court, the Montoro case has provided a breath of fresh air~ Pressure in the Congress of Deputies

However, the Montoro case has not been overlooked in the Congress of Deputies, which will hold its last plenary session before the summer this Tuesday. The companies that obtained tax benefits through this scheme played a key role. The party led by Díaz is already in contact with the other parties. For example, they acknowledge that they welcome the initiative. The Cerdán case and the Montoro case demonstrate that Spain has "democratic deficits": "Any state that has corruption rooted in its foundations is a state that violates equal opportunities, equality, and democracy," stated the ERC spokesperson.

At the center of the investigation, which until now has been kept secret, is Equipo Económico (EE), the consultancy firm founded by Cristóbal Montoro himself in 2006. The investigation places the firm at the center of a "network of influence" created by the former minister who allegedly devised amodus operandifor distributing profits obtained from alleged illicit operations: payments in exchange for changing laws. The money was allegedly distributed through the firm, which then diverted the funds in two ways: by generously compensating its partners and by invoicing them through shell companies, which were also owned by some of these partners.