Video provided by Antena 3 Canarias with images from the hearing held this Wednesday in Gran Canaria.
The Provincial Court has in its hands to decide whether or not to authorize the reopening of the Stratvs winery, which was sealed last December by court order. At 9:15 a.m. this Wednesday, a hearing was held in which the Court heard from the parties involved in the criminal case opened for the construction of Stratvs, to decide whether to accept the appeal filed by the company and lift the precautionary measures adopted four months ago by the head of Investigating Court Number 5, Silvia Muñoz.
At that time, both the Prosecutor's Office and the two private prosecutions filed requested the closure of the facility. However, after receiving the results of the latest tastings taken by Seprona at the winery, which do not reflect contamination levels, both the prosecutor and the lawyer for a member of the Negrín family, who appeared in the case as a victim, have not opposed the reopening.
In any case, the Prosecutor's Office has stressed that these tastings were taken when the winery was already sealed and, therefore, that the only thing they confirm is that there is no contamination when the facility does not carry out its usual activity. Therefore, although it has not opposed the lifting of the precautionary closure measures, the prosecutor has requested that if the reopening is allowed, the necessary measures be taken beforehand to guarantee compliance with the law and avoid possible new crimes and spills.
The private prosecution, represented by the Urban Transparency association, has defended that the winery remains closed. In her speech, the lawyer Irma Ferrer has once again brought to the table all the crimes that are being investigated in this case, beyond those that affect possible contamination.
The decision, in the hands of the Court
Throughout this Wednesday, the Second Section of the Provincial Court is expected to make a decision after hearing from the parties, including the company's defense, represented by the lawyer Felipe Fernández Camero. All of them have spoken for about 15 minutes before the room withdrew to deliberate.
Although a long list of crimes is being investigated in this criminal case, linked above all to the construction of the winery, the possible crime against the environment, due to spills that could be polluting, was decisive for the judge to order the closure last December. And it is that when precautionary measures are adopted in a criminal case, it is to prevent alleged crimes from continuing to be committed, such as that of spills.
When it comes to illegal licenses or lack of permits, the power to act lies with the administration, in this case with the Yaiza City Council. In fact, if the Justice Department allowed the winery to reopen, the southern Consistory would have to resume the file opened at the time, which proposed the total closure of the facility. It should be remembered that in September 2013 the City Council already ordered the closure of the restaurant, but had yet to complete the file on the rest of the facility.
For the time being, in another parallel procedure, the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands has endorsed the closure of the restaurant ordered by the Consistory, so that space will remain closed regardless of what the Provincial Court of Las Palmas decides this Wednesday.
