"The entire basis of the plot or fraud lies in the illegal invoice registry that Carlos Sáenz has in the Comptroller's Office." This is how prosecutor Ignacio Stampa summarized what happened with the payments from the Arrecife City Council to Proselan, but also with other alleged embezzlement crimes that the Justice system is investigating in that City Council. "They cannot do it without the comptroller," Stampa pointed out, referring to the role of the other three defendants in piece 13 of the Unión case, which was seen for sentencing this Friday.
When presenting his conclusions during the last day of the trial, the prosecutor went so far as to describe Carlos Sáenz as "the hand that rocks the cradle." According to him, "it seems that what the comptroller says has to go to mass," but the problem arises "when the piece that fails is the comptroller." In his account, the prosecutor referred to that "parallel" invoice registry that existed until recently in the Comptroller's Office, outside the General Registry where they must be submitted, and therefore outside the control of the rest of the City Council. It was in that "illegal" registry of the Comptroller's Office where the Proselan invoices were presented in December 2008, which that same month ended up collecting 250,000 euros from the City Council for allegedly unperformed work.
Supposedly, the businessman José Daniel Hernández Arráez carried out lighting work on the occasion of different Arrecife festivals. However, no one in the Festivals area knew about this hiring, as confirmed by all the witnesses during the first days of the trial. Furthermore, they indicated that these services were not necessary (most of the time they were carried out by the municipal workers themselves) nor is there any record that they were executed. In fact, it was the City Council itself that reported these events to the Prosecutor's Office, when Festivals detected these payments after the outbreak of Operation Unión and the break-up of the government group between the PSOE and the PIL.
The one who made the alleged order to José Daniel Hernández was the head of the Technical Office, Rafael Arrocha, also accused in the case. And as a public official, the former Councilor for Finance and Urban Planning, José Miguel Rodríguez, authorized the payment, who has confessed that he "contributed to embezzling" that money.
"Lighting, a dark spot in this City Council"
"The paradox is that the lighting of Arrecife is one of the darkest spots in this City Council," the prosecutor stressed, also referring to another procedure, the Montecarlo case. In one of the pieces of that case, payments to another electricity company, Inelcon, are being investigated, which, according to Stampa, would have received more than 2 million euros in suspicious payments. During the trial, the parallel between this piece of Unión and the Montecarlo case, in which the main defendant is Carlos Sáenz, although together with other politicians and technicians, has been highlighted on several occasions.
Furthermore, the prosecutor has gone so far as to state that Sáenz should also have been in the dock in the first trial of the Unión case, for payments for services not provided to Francisco Rodríguez Batllori. In this regard, he recalled that if no accusation was made against the comptroller in that piece, it was because the original invoices did not appear at the time and because Sáenz's signature did not appear on those in the case.
However, after the searches carried out with Operation Montecarlo, the agents found those original invoices in Carlos Sáenz's office. "When they were contributed to that case (to the Unión piece for payments to Batllori), it was no longer possible to formulate an accusation," the prosecutor recalled, explaining that at that time the order of abbreviated procedure had already been issued, which is the one that puts an end to the investigation. If it had not been so, he added, "the Prosecutor's Office has no doubt that he would also have been accused in that procedure."
"An insult to the Court and to the people who are having a bad time"
Regarding José Daniel Hernández, the prosecutor considers that "the defendant portrayed himself" when in his statement during the trial "he said that it was a matter of luck to present 10 invoices on December 2 at the City Council, create an account on the 9th and collect 250,000 euros on the 26th," when some of the alleged works had not even finished being provided yet, since there were invoices for "dismantling" electrical installations at parties that had not yet concluded.
On the other hand, other invoices corresponded to alleged works carried out almost a year before, in February and March 2008, but it was not until December when he presented them for collection. And he managed to get them all paid together in just over 20 days, despite the fact that "we know that the City Council does not pay on the spot," as the prosecutor recalled. "It is an insult not only to the Court, but to all the people who are having a bad time," Stampa pointed out.
Furthermore, he stressed that the only witnesses provided by the businessman's defense were "several acquaintances of his to say that he had done the same in San Bartolomé," but none who spoke of his alleged work in Arrecife. "They did not prove anything," the prosecutor concluded, who stressed that the only thing that both municipalities have in common is the comptroller, Carlos Sáenz, who at that time was also the head of the Comptroller's Office in San Bartolomé (he stopped being so after being arrested in Operation Montecarlo, although he is still the comptroller of Arrecife). "The only thing he could demonstrate is that the administrations are rotten," Stampa warned, referring to the work that Hernández Arráez claims to have carried out and charged in that municipality, also without a prior contract.
"Apart from embezzlement, it is bribery"
After recalling that the company to which Arrecife paid 250,000 euros had "neither premises, nor employees nor vehicles," the prosecutor has gone so far as to state that not only would alleged crimes of embezzlement have been committed, which are the ones being judged, but also bribery. However, he clarified that if the accusation has not been made for that crime it is because no evidence has been found that the businessman handed over money as a bribe to the other three defendants. What he did stress is that on the same day that José Daniel Hernández received that amount from the City Council in the account he had just created, he withdrew all the money, without it being known where it went.
Regarding Rafael Arrocha, the Prosecutor's Office considers that "his defensive thesis is implausible." During his statement, Arrocha explained that he himself verbally commissioned José Daniel Hernández to carry out these works, consisting of alleged electrical installations on the occasion of different Arrecife festivals. However, no one in the Festivals area was aware of them. And all this despite the fact that both Arrocha and Carlos Sáenz stated that the order was made and paid for with a item from the Technical Office because Festivals had exhausted its budget.
"Errors", "lack of skill" and "shoddy" result
Furthermore, the prosecutor has emphasized the "errors" and "miscalculations" in which he considers that the defendants incurred, and which were highlighted during the first two days of the trial. For example, presenting invoices and paying them even before the date on which that alleged service was finished being provided arrived, and charging double invoices for the same parties, one for assembly and another for dismantling, and each one in a different name (one in the name of Proselan and the other directly in the name of the owner, José Daniel Hernández)
"They didn't even have skill", the prosecutor pointed out, who considers that the final result was even "shoddy". Among these "errors", he has also referred again to another related to the comptroller, who made a credit retention when the alleged work had already been carried out. "A subsequent credit retention that not even he understood, but that is part of the whole plot," the prosecutor pointed out, recalling that during his statement, Sáenz could not explain why he made that retention.
Furthermore, he insisted that the comptroller did not carry out "any type of supervision", despite the fact that there was "a gross splitting of the invoicing" and despite the fact that the invoices had not entered through the official registry of the City Council, nor are there even prior budgets for the work that was going to be carried out, among other deficiencies in the file. "Carlos Sáenz cannot validate the payment even if he trusts Rafael Arrocha a lot", the prosecutor warned, who considers that the comptroller should have supervised both if it was a service contract and if it was a minor works contract, as the defenses maintain.
In any case, the Prosecutor's Office considers that what was supposedly being contracted was a service and not a work. This means that the limit of the minor contract is 18,000 euros (in the works the limit is 50,000), when in this case more than 40,000 were paid, in two different invoices, for each party. And that, among other added requirements, would have forced it to be put out to tender, in case the services were really going to be provided.
At the conclusion of his intervention, the prosecutor emphasized the damage caused by these actions, generating not only economic damage to the institution, but also a loss of confidence of the citizens, who "has reached such a point that they consider that these things are normal". Furthermore, he has described the attitude of the City Council as "processual schizophrenia", which is appearing as an accusation in the case to demand civil liability, that is, that the defendants return the allegedly embezzled money, but has not formulated a criminal accusation nor has it initiated a procedure to reimburse that money. Furthermore, he recalled that four witnesses who testified in the trial, including the current mayor of Arrecife, José Montelongo, are accused in the Montecarlo case for similar events.
