The Investigating Court Number 2 of Arrecife has refused to delay the statement of the Coalición Canaria councilors in the Cabildo, who must appear this Friday as investigated for the alleged falsification of the regulation on which they based their decision to expel Juan Manuel Sosa from the group.
After their summons, Samuel Martín, Oscar Pérez, David de la Hoz, Domingo Cejas, Migdalia Machín and Tania Ramón Espinosa presented a document requesting that their statement be delayed, in order to have "knowledge of the facts investigated with sufficient time to prepare their defense." However, the judge has rejected their request.
“There is no place for the suspension of the statements scheduled for May 27, 2022, and this, firstly, because sufficient time has passed between the summons and the appointment,” the magistrate points out in his resolution.
In addition, he adds that all the investigated have appointed the same lawyer (Ignacio Luis Acha García) and the same solicitor (Noelia Lemes Rodríguez) that his colleague Pedro San Ginés already had in this case, “so that both professionals have full knowledge of the proceedings”
"Determine if it was an ad hoc creation"
The procedure was initiated by a complaint from Juan Manuel Sosa against San Ginés, who was already charged in this case for an alleged crime of coercion. In the complaint, Sosa stated that he received threats from Pedro San Ginés urging him to hand over his act in the Cabildo, and the Provincial Court ordered the Court to investigate him.
Afterwards, Sosa presented an extension of the complaint, which was also admitted for processing and is what has led to the indictment of the rest of the CC councilors.
This extension is based on his subsequent expulsion from the CC-PNC political group in the Cabildo, based on an alleged regulation that, according to the councilor, “was created artificially to justify his expulsion", which "would involve a crime of falsification of a public document and another of violation of fundamental rights".
In his order, dated last May, the magistrate concluded that it should be “determined whether the CC-PNC group's regulation was an ad hoc creation aimed at artificially substantiating the expulsion of the complainant”.