Felipe Fernández Camero will not be able to avoid sitting in the dock for the alleged "looting" of one million euros from the Yaiza Town Hall. The Second Section of the Provincial Court of Las Palmas has just rejected his last appeal, against the order that ended the investigation of this case. In its new resolution, the Court affirms that the arguments it raised in January 2014, when it ordered the investigation into those payments for allegedly unprovided services to continue, are maintained "point by point".
Now, with that investigation completed by the Investigating Court Number 1 of Arrecife, the Provincial Court concludes that there are "clear criminal indications" in the conduct of Fernández Camero, the former mayor of Yaiza, José Francisco Reyes, the former secretary, Vicente Bartolomé Fuentes, and the former municipal worker Antonio Fernández Martín. For the first three, the Prosecutor's Office is asking for six years in prison and for the fourth, five years and nine months. All of them had appealed the Court's order that ended the investigation of the case, but their appeals have been rejected by the Court, in a resolution dated January 25.
This case against Camero arose as a separate piece of the Yate case. In that procedure, the lawyer was charged as the alleged "inducer of the allegedly criminal conduct of José Francisco Reyes", who faces a petition of 25 years in prison for the massive granting of illegal licenses in Playa Blanca. However, in the case of Fernández Camero, the charges against him were eventually dropped, as it could not be proven that he had advised Reyes.
Precisely because of this lack of evidence of his advice, prosecutor Ignacio Stampa then asked to open this new piece. And it is that, among other things, Camero charged the Town Hall about 2,000 euros every month for alleged services as an advisor, despite the fact that there is no evidence that they were provided. In addition to that monthly payment, Camero also charged as a lawyer for the Corporation in different lawsuits. And all this, while at the same time working (directly or through his office) for the promoters who obtained illegal licenses in Playa Blanca.
"Overlap of professional services"
Regarding those monthly payments that Camero received, the Court reiterates that it has not been "justified" that the Town Hall "had to resort to the services of the accused on a permanent basis throughout the twelve months of the year and, in addition, hire him as a lawyer in numerous cases". In fact, it considers that there was an "overlap of professional services of a legal nature", charging as an advisor and then as a lawyer in the lawsuits.
"That advice could be provided by Mr. Fernández Camero as a practicing lawyer, without the need to receive a fixed remuneration every month at the expense of municipal budgets," the order emphasizes. In addition, it sees indications of an "evident and gross" prevarication, since it also considers that "the most elementary regulations on administrative contracting" were violated.
In his defense, Camero argued that these were different jobs and described it as a "diabolical test" to have to prove that this advice was carried out. However, the Court rejects this argument. "If the services were provided continuously, all those who were part of the Municipal Corporation, and are not accused, may testify in this regard," the order emphasizes, which adds that during the investigation, not a single witness has been provided to confirm that this "continuous and permanent" advice existed, as to justify the collection of a fixed monthly amount.
In total, the lawyer received 229,395 euros from the Town Hall for this alleged work as an advisor, in addition to the payments as a lawyer. In addition, the Corporation even paid him allowances, trips and even unjustified taxis. And all this, according to the Prosecutor's Office, by virtue of a plan that Camero "devised" and for which he had a "verbal agreement with the other three defendants" in this case, who followed his "instructions".
A certification "entirely mendacious"
Regarding the documentary evidence provided by the defense, Fernández Camero presented in December 2012 a certification signed, supposedly, by the accidental secretary of the Yaiza Town Hall, which assured that the services were indeed provided. However, the person who signed it was Antonio Fernández Martín, who when he issued that certification did not hold the position of secretary. This was warned by the investigating judge and the Prosecutor's Office, which described that document as "entirely mendacious in its content and form". Shortly after, Fernández Martín himself was charged in the case, since some of the payments to Camero were authorized by himself, when at some moments of the period under investigation he did replace Bartolomé Fuentes as secretary-auditor.
In its order, the Court concludes that this certification "cannot prove by itself that the services were provided continuously and permanently". Regarding the rest of the documentary evidence provided by the defense of Fernández Camero, the Court pointed out in its day that "it consists of legal reports and opinions, fundamentally, but apart from the fact that they are not very numerous, they do not have any entry stamp in the municipal offices and other registration that proves that they were effectively issued in the development of that permanent contractual relationship between the accused and the Municipal Corporation and not as a lawyer hired by it".
"Simply intends to delay the investigation"
In his appeal asking for the annulment of the order that closed the investigation of this case, Camero also alleged that the judge had not admitted other proceedings that he requested. However, the Court recalls that the order itself that rejected this request stated that "it lacks relevance, since it simply intends to delay the investigation of the present case". Specifically, Fernández Camero intended that each Court certify the lawsuits in which he intervened, when that information is already on record in the case.
"There is no need to provide to this case a testified copy, nothing less than the litigation with its corresponding procedures of precautionary measures, appeals for reconsideration, appeal, cassation or protection and execution derived, if applicable, from the main litigation", concludes the order, which considers that the diligence that the investigating judge agreed on in his day on this issue "is more than sufficient to prove in which litigation he has intervened".
Regarding the possible delays in this case, it should be recalled that with the investigation already closed, the Association for the Defense of Legality and Guarantees of the Jiménez de Asúa Process requested to appear in the procedure. This association is the same one that has tried to enter different pieces of the Unión case and that was expelled by Judge Silvia Muñoz. The Prosecutor's Office itself opposed the appearance in Unión, considering that the association could be a "Trojan horse" with "illegitimate interests". Among other things, prosecutor Javier Ródenas warned that a new appearance at that stage of the procedure would only serve to delay it. In the case of the case against Camero, the investigating judge did accept the appearance, although it has been appealed by the Prosecutor's Office and that appeal has yet to be resolved.
In addition to this procedure, Felipe Fernández Camero is charged in the Unión case, in which he was arrested. In a piece of that case, the only one whose investigation remains open in Court Number 5 of Arrecife, he is being investigated for his time as secretary of the Arrecife Town Hall, specifically during the time of María Isabel Déniz in the Mayor's Office. In that piece of Unión, the Association of Jurists Jiménez de Asúa also requested to appear.
