The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office has opposed the appeal in which José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero demands that the US be asked for detailed explanations about the phone with incriminating messages for the former Prime Minister, belonging to the Venezuelan businessman Rodolfo Reyes. The judge of the National Court Antonio Piña considered it premature and the defense appealed to the Chamber. Now the case prosecutor, Elena Lorente, has submitted a document in which she agrees with the instructor’s criterion and rebuts Víctor Moreno Catena – Professor of Procedural Law – stating that it is not “the appropriate procedural moment” for that request.
Read more The Police raise to 3 million the immigrants regularized with their families
Zapatero’s lawyer seeks to deny the validity of the content of Reyes’ phone, investigated in the Plus Ultra case and currently beyond the reach of Spanish Justice. Although this is not the direct object of the appeal, the Prosecutor’s Office document aligns with the validity of the evidence, indicating that the phone’s content was obtained by “the sovereign authorities of another country, in this case, the United States, under its internal legislation and regulations.”
“Yes, bro. Our buddy Zapatero behind” was one of the messages found on Reyes’ phone, referring to the successes of his efforts for the airline in which he was a shareholder to finally obtain the 53 million bailout.
Judge Piña considered that what corresponded to do at this moment was to request authorization from the United States to use that material in a possible trial of the former president. Only after receiving a response would he study the long list of clarifications raised by the defense, related to aspects such as the intervention of judicial authority in the seizure and the chain of custody.
The phone’s content was copied in 2021 by US police authorities – Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) – at the airport when Reyes was trying to enter the country. It was sent to the Spanish Police at the beginning of this year, when his home was searched by order of the National Court and his name was included in police search systems.
Read more Volkswagen warns that it could cut up to 100,000 jobs in total
Zapatero argues that Judge Piña, in the order in which he asks the US, states that the seizure had been carried out by a “judicial” authority. “It is obvious that HSI is not, strictu sensu, a judicial authority, but an administrative one, as it is also obvious that the defense did not request clarification at the time on this point, which, moreover, had no impact on that resolution.”
Zapatero’s list of appeals includes another for alleged defenselessness when summoned to testify about the jewels found in his safe. Against the claim that he had no time to prepare his defense, the prosecutor highlights that he could start doing so from May 19, the day when, after several hesitations, his secretary agreed to open his safe.
There can be no defenselessness, she states, because the investigated party invoked his right not to answer and may do so when it suits him. “For now, we do not know under what circumstances Mr. Rodríguez Zapatero obtained these jewels,” adds the prosecutor, almost a month after Zapatero testified at the Court and almost two months after the search of his office.
