The Court of Instruction Number 3 of Arrecife has rejected the appeal filed by the Coalición Canaria group in the Cabildo, which sought to have its appearance admitted in the case regarding the management of Carlos Espino in the Tourist Centers, when the procedure has already been dismissed as no evidence of a crime was found. In its order, dated last Friday, February 14, the magistrate also orders the CC group to pay the costs generated by this appeal, considering that it has acted with "manifest recklessness."
"They knew the unfounded nature of their procedural position," the resolution states, reiterating the same arguments that the judge already expressed in another order last December. Thus, Magistrate José Luis Martínez repeats to the CC group in the Cabildo that it has neither demonstrated a "legitimate interest" in this case nor does it have legal personality to act as a popular accusation.
Regarding the former, he recalls that they requested to appear when more than a decade had passed since this procedure began and "once the instruction (and all its possible or imaginable extensions) was exhausted," thus questioning their true interest. Furthermore, he recalls that both the Public Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution, i.e., the Tourist Centers, have been involved in the case, concluding that "the belated appearance submitted for examination does not meet the sine qua non requirement of legitimate interest."
In this regard, he refers again to different jurisprudence that he already cited in the previous order, with judgments that have been warning that "there must be some point of connection between the popular accusation and the interest being defended," "unless we understand that the mere fact of being a political adversary legitimizes without further ado to exercise a criminal accusation."
CC compares this case with the one that will bring San Ginés to trial
Regarding the other reason for rejecting their appearance, the magistrate insists that a political group of an institution does not have legal personality, since they are only constituted "for certain actions within the framework of the local entity," but they cannot act outside of it as an association. "Any external action, such as procedural action, must be assumed individually by the councilors or by the political parties they represent, which do have legal personality in the terms provided by law," the magistrate reiterates.
Although this argument was already expressed in the first order in December rejecting their appearance, the CC group appealed it, alleging that there was "discriminatory treatment with respect to the local group of Podemos," specifically in the case in which the spokesperson of the Coalición Canaria group, Pedro San Ginés, is accused of seizing the Montaña Roja desalination plant. However, the truth is that the Podemos group has never been involved in that procedure, but rather the councilors who were, who are the ones who can do so as natural persons.
In fact, as San Ginés himself knows - who unsuccessfully tried to avoid his trial using this argument - to this day the accusation is still being exercised personally by Carlos Meca and Pablo Ramírez, who are no longer part of the Podemos group in the Cabildo, nor do they continue in the Island Corporation or in the party. And both now and at the beginning of the procedure, their names appear in all the orders of that case.
The Prosecutor's Office also opposed the appeal
The magistrate thus ratifies his decision not to admit the appearance of the CC group, and therefore not to uphold their appeal against the dismissal of the case. This decision, against which an appeal can now be filed with the Provincial Court, was also endorsed by the Public Prosecutor's Office, which opposed the appeal with a writing that the judge describes as "thorough and forceful," and which he "shares and assumes in all its terms."
Furthermore, after pointing out that the CC group's appeal included statements such as that with it they were trying to "avoid a real judicial absurdity," the magistrate also adds other arguments and cites new jurisprudence. "It is precisely in the chambers of popular and citizen representation where it is necessary to exercise the functions that the law grants to elected representatives, and not to try to get from the judges what is not achieved with the normal functioning of the political bodies," he states in his order.
