The Public Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution, led by the daughter of the businessman from Conejero, Antonio González, have filed a new appeal, this time of appeal, against the dismissal of the case for false testimony and false accusation that the Supreme Court was pursuing against the regional senator Pedro San Ginés (CC).
This appeal comes after the Criminal Chamber of the High Court rejected a few weeks ago the appeal for reversal filed by both prosecutions against the definitive dismissal and free dismissal of the case that judged the former president of Lanzarote.
The Public Prosecutor's Office insists that the complaint filed by Pedro San Ginés against Carlos Espino and the contracts of the Tourist Centers with Climafrical was a response to the complaint filed by Espino months before and that uncovered the largest political corruption plot in the Canary Islands, the Unión case.
The Prosecutor's Office emphasizes that San Ginés "orchestrated a false action", using police officers and "lying" in his judicial statements. These accusations not only reached Espino, but also the owner of Climafrical, Antonio González, who "was even asked for a bond of more than one million euros."
In the appeal presented, he insists that San Ginés "acted with full knowledge that his accusations were not sustained" and attributes the complaint to "an apparent political game."
Meanwhile, the private prosecution, led by Alexandra González Viera, daughter of Antonio González, argues that when the procedure reached the Supreme Court, after San Ginés's status as senator, the investigation phase was already "totally completed" and what is now appropriate is to consult the Senate on his prosecution. Therefore, he argues that the action of the Supreme Court judge is not "in accordance with the law" because it acted as "if the investigation had never been completed and reopening it."
In addition, the private prosecution emphasizes that San Ginés acquired the status of aforado after a year of paralysis of the procedure and after the opening of the oral trial was ordered. "It could be concluded that the status of aforado is not a guarantee for the free exercise of the freedom of a senator, but a privilege in relation to any other investigated," he emphasizes in the appeal filed with the Supreme Court.
The complaint against Antonio González
The Public Prosecutor's Office argues that San Ginés allegedly falsely accused the sole administrator of Climafrical, Antonio González, the then CEO of the Centers for Art, Culture and Tourism of Lanzarote, Carlos Espinos, and José Manuel Páez.
In the appeal to which La Voz has accessed, the Public Prosecutor's Office insists that San Ginés did accuse Antonio González when he appeared at the Costa Teguise Civil Guard headquarters that Wednesday, November 11, 2009, at 10:30 p.m. at night.
The Prosecutor's Office explains that since the complaint was filed, it can be "extracted" that San Ginés had "the intention of wanting to lie in a malicious way and with intentional subjectivism" to cause "damage" to Antonio González.
In his complaint, the then island president attributed to González "certain crimes" for having contracted with the Tourist Centers and stressed that he was "a well-known businessman, affiliated with the PSOE."
Secondly, when he went to the Benemérita barracks, San Ginés was president of the Island Council and had been CEO of the CACT and "knew perfectly" the organizational structure of the administration.
The role of Coalición Canaria
The Public Prosecutor's Office highlights the connection between the complaint and the political intention. The Prosecutor's Office is "powerfully struck" that his complaint was endorsed by "a legal report from a lawyer whose name he does not know" and who "belonged to his political party, Coalición Canaria."
"Experience tells us that in these cases [...] the documentation that is presented" are "official documents legally obtained and with legal reports from the administration" and especially, if the complainant is the president of the Island Council," he insists in the appeal.
The Prosecutor's Office emphasizes that Pedro San Ginés filed that complaint with the support "of the political party to which he belonged, but not by the institution he represented." In addition, he considers the possibility that it was made "à la carte".
The lawsuit of the Tourist Centers
In May 2010, the Centers for Art, Culture and Tourism, under the presidency of San Ginés, filed a lawsuit against Carlos Espino and made "express reference" to Antonio González. The Prosecutor's Office insists that when comparing that lawsuit with the complaint "the wording belongs to the same hand" and the paragraphs that affect Climafrical "are identical" to the complaint delivered to the Benemérita.
In addition, he explains that the lawsuit was not accompanied by technical-legal reports prepared by the administration. The complaints concluded with the dismissal of the case after ten years of accusations against Carlos Espino and Antonio González, who died without knowing that the procedure against him had been dismissed.
Indictment for false accusation and false testimony
Finally, the Investigating Court number 2 of Arrecife charged the former island president with the crimes of false testimony and false accusation.
The Prosecutor's Office points out that Pedro San Ginés fell "into inaccuracies" when he testified before the investigating judge. Among them, the current senator assured that the councilor of the public entity, José Juan Lorenzo Rodríguez, informed him of these irregularities but "there is no record that he denounced any irregularity, nor issued a report in this regard."
In addition, the Economic Director of the EPEL of the Centers, Francisco Ortega Reguilón, assured that "the works carried out were necessary and the invoices were supervised and were correct." This was also endorsed by two judicial experts.
"All the accusations made throughout the procedure [...] did not correspond to the truth," the Ministry states. In addition, he emphasizes that "it would be appropriate to analyze whether these inaccuracies, to use a neutral word, responded to a spurious interest of the complainant."
The Public Prosecutor's Office responds to the investigating judge and asks him to revoke the dismissal order and agree to the continuation of the procedure "through legal channels."
