The court has filed the case against him former president from Generalitat Francisco Camps, its vice president Víctor Campos and the auxiliary bishop of Valencia Esteban Escudero, among other positions, for the contracts during the visit of the Papa Benedict XVI to the city in 2006.
Thus, the provisional dismissal of the case has been ordered by the hiring of the V Encuentro Mundial de las Familias Foundation (FVEMF) for Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to the city in 2006.
The case also included as investigated the legal representative of the foundation, Francisco Javier Jimenez; the secretary of the Archdiocese, Antonio Corbi; Enrique Perez Boada, commissioner of the visit of Benedict XVI, and Henar Molinero, general secretary of the foundation. Previously, the Court had accepted the appeal of the former regional secretary of Finance Eusebio Monzó to be investigated in this case.
In the dismissal order – dated this Thursday, December 10, and consulted by Europa Press – it is recalled that the court has been investigating since 2016 if crimes of prevarication and embezzlement were committed in the contracts signed between various companies and the FVEMF for the visit of the pontiff to the capital of the Turia.
Once the investigation was concluded, the defenders of the investigated requested the file of the case, while the Generalitat Valenciana requested the initiation of an abbreviated procedure. The Prosecutor demanded to continue the case against Francisco Camps, Víctor Campos and Enrique Pérez Boada, on the one hand, and Monsignor Escudero, Antonio Corbí Copoví and Francisco Javier Jiménez, on the other, and pleaded for the provisional dismissal for Henar Molinero. Now, the court has decided to archive the case as it did not see any evidence of the alleged commission of the crimes.
Services and debts
Among the facts that have been analyzed are the contracts that the FVEMF signed with 11 companies, the contribution of two million euros by the Generalitat Valenciana in 2010 as a foundation endowment and the assumption of debts in 2014 for the amount of 1,306,897 euros.
In the first place, the judge refers in her decision-against which fit appeal– the legal status of the FVEMF and cites the testimony of various witnesses to point out that the entity “was not public in nature because it was not attached to any public administration, a fact that did not occur until 2010”.
But, in addition, he points out, “of which there is no indication whatsoever is that those investigated had agreed at the beginning to set up a Foundation in order to commit a crime, that they were aware that the Foundation had to be subject to the regulations for hiring the public sector to sign the contracts that it signed and that with said knowledge and knowing of that public nature that is defended and arbitrarily had been concluded to circumvent the regulations and contract with the companies that developed the work or provided the services to thus favor the same, favoring of what does not exist the slightest trace during the instruction.
«It is not clear from the actions nor the arbitrariness or the injustice claimed by the criminal legislation and despite what the Prosecutor affirmed in his brief concerning the continuation of the procedure, these points must be evaluated, without this implying an acquittal in the instance, because it is necessary for the purposes of determining whether there are rational indications of the commission of the crime of prevarication that is intended, that is, it must be assessed at this time whether the denounced acts have a criminal liability or not.
In this regard, it states that the one who was the legal representative of the FVEMF and signatory of 9 of the 11 contracts signed by the Foundation, Jiménez Fortea -professor of procedural law and knowledgeable of the rules, remarks- carried out the corresponding studies and consultations in advance to carry out any action on behalf of the Foundation, “having undoubtedly concluded that it was private in nature and the decision to contract was left to the free will of the parties.”
Likewise, the judge believes that “no specific conduct is described in this regard in the brief requesting the continuation of the procedure with respect to those investigated” and warns that the mere fact that they had any position or any relationship with the FVEMF is not sufficient.
Specifically, regarding the ‘expresident’ Camps asserts that “he was Honorary President of the Foundation, without any specific attribution that is recorded and from what he acted during the investigation, no participation in the Foundation’s activity has been revealed, beyond his presence in institutional events due to his character, also, as president of the Generalitat Valenciana ».
Regarding the crime of embezzlement of public funds, the order states that “no evidence has emerged throughout the investigation that the public officials who had public funds at their disposal had stolen them, appropriated them or consented let others steal or appropriate them ».
It adds that there is no indication that the two million euros that were contributed to the foundation “had been obtained through the irregular diversion of a budget item of public funds, as stated in the prosecutor’s letter and, above all, nothing has remained incidentally proven with respect to the subjective element of the type, that is, the profit motive that should be present at the time of developing the behavior.
«All the decisions taken by the Consell that affected public funds, both the initial contribution of 10,000 euros at the time of the Foundation’s constitution, as well as the subsequent one in 2010 relating to the two million euros as the 2014 agreement assumption of debts, were adopted with the favorable reports of the Intervention of the Ministry of Economy and the Lawyers of the Generalitat Valenciana and subsequently audited and verified by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, agreements adopted with due publicity without any irregularity having been observed ”, adds the ruling.
«From the diligences carried out during the investigation, no element can be deduced that allows us to maintain that the resolutions adopted by the Consell in 2005, 2009, 2010 and 2014 had not respected the forms, or that they had been adopted in a arbitrary or that had been carried out outside of the regulatory regulations, “he adds.
Therefore, since the concurrence of the elements of the criminal types that are denounced has not been proven, the judge decrees the dismissal of the proceedings.