The Badajoz Court has issued a ruling condemning David Sánchez, brother of the Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, to nine years of disqualification. David Sánchez, who will not go to prison, was tried in early June for the crimes of malfeasance and influence peddling along with ten other people, accused of having secured a job at the Badajoz Provincial Council, that of coordinator of the conservatories, created to his measure by the then president of the entity, Miguel Ángel Gallardo.
Read more The ‘fast tech’ trap: why we replace our mobile phone so often
David Sánchez has been convicted “as the author by necessary cooperation of a crime of administrative malfeasance” and acquitted of the alleged crime of influence peddling of which he was also accused. He will not be able to hold public office nor exercise the right to passive suffrage for nine years. The same sentence has been imposed on the former president of the Badajoz Provincial Council and former secretary general of the Extremadura PSOE, Miguel Ángel Gallardo.
The sentence, which was made public this morning, establishes three blocks of proven facts relating to the creation and awarding to David Sánchez of the position of coordinator of the Badajoz conservatories in 2017, the change of position to director of the Office of Performing Arts in 2022, and the creation of another position of coordinator of Cross-Border Activities in 2023 for Luis Carrero, a friend of David Sánchez. These are the three points on which the process pivoted.
Regarding the creation of the position of coordinator of the conservatories for David Sánchez in 2017, the court, which issued the ruling unanimously, considers it proven that prior to David Sánchez’s arrival, the functions of this position were carried out by “conservatory teachers in their free hours and without receiving any extra pay for it.”
Furthermore, the court concludes that this position was unnecessary and that David Sánchez was not going to work. Thus, during their witness statements, the directors of the conservatories “indicated that they had never requested the creation of the position, that its place in the organizational chart was nonsense.” Even Gallardo himself, faced with the initial personnel proposal, stated: “it seems to me that you are asking for too much.” It was also proven at trial that the accused “neither resided in Badajoz nor regularly traveled to this city,” living in Portugal since the end of 2021.
The court also does not see David Sánchez as the suitable person to hold that position, since the Prime Minister’s brother “had no knowledge whatsoever about the functioning of the Badajoz Conservatories” and, after being hired, “neglected his duties and commitments by barely attending his workplace.”
Regarding the change of position, from coordinator of the conservatories to director of the Office of Performing Arts in 2022, the sentence states that “they sought a way to adapt the duties assigned to Mr. Sánchez to his personal tastes and interests,” focusing the position on the “Young Opera” program. To carry out this transformation, an “irregularity” was committed by “removing the ‘i’ of incompatibility” in his new contract, despite incompatibility being mandatory by law.
David Sánchez “neglected his duties and commitments by barely attending his workplace”
This process was based on a regulation that “does not have the nature of such, it is not a Legal Norm, given that it has never been approved or published,” so the court states that the administrative act “was disguised as a mere change of nomenclature” to avoid controls.
Finally, the court holds that the position created in 2023 for Luis Carrero, a friend of David Sánchez, was fictitious, as it was “a position empty of effective content,” which was granted to Carrero, who “previously maintained a close personal relationship with Mr. David,” even addressing each other in their communications as “little brother.”
Read more Paneque attributes the sinkhole in Putxet to insufficient concrete injection in the cavity
The court acquits David Sánchez of the crime of influence peddling due to lack of solid evidence
The sentence consequently determines that “two newly created paid positions with public funds were delivered so that they could dedicate themselves to whatever activities they fancied, without any control.” It adds that “none of the accused were unaware of the criminal plan devised by the highest authorities of the Badajoz Provincial Council.” And that they acted in “connivance, executing a preconceived plan” to carry out “arbitrary acts” with the sole purpose of “favoring Mr. David Sánchez Pérez-Castejón.”
Despite all these facts, the court has only convicted David Sánchez of a crime of administrative malfeasance and acquitted him of the charge of influence peddling due to the lack of solid evidence proving that real pressure was exerted or that the hierarchical position was exploited to issue arbitrary resolutions.
Thus, the judges state that, after the evidence presented, “we harbor doubts, which have not been dispelled… regarding the use of specific pressure conduct, leverage, ultimately, influences exerted” to obtain the economic benefit of those involved.
“We do not know, in short, who exerted pressure or influence over those responsible for carrying out the task of twisting the law, nor in which specific acts the influence materialized,” the magistrates indicate, who determine that one cannot be convicted of influence peddling without a “concrete and complete factual description and accreditation” of the facts, which obliges applying the legal principle of “in dubio pro reo” (when in doubt, in favor of the accused).
On the other hand, the judges do consider it proven that a crime of administrative malfeasance occurred, established in article 404 of the Penal Code, since for this offense to occur specific requirements must be met, highlighting that illegality alone is not enough, but a “twisting” of the law is required.
The sentence recalls that administrative malfeasance consists of issuing a “resolution dictated by an authority or official in an administrative matter” that is “objectively contrary to the law, that is, illegal” and that this act must cause a “materially unjust result” having been issued with the purpose of “enforcing the particular will of the authority or official” against the law.
The sentence, which is not final and can be appealed within ten days before the Superior Court of Justice of Extremadura, contemplates that the convicted assume the part of the costs corresponding to the crime of malfeasance, which will be prorated among them, with Gallardo being responsible for “two twelfths of that half” and the rest of the accused “one twelfth each.”
Read more The reason why the King will follow the Spain-France from Barcelona
(More to come)
