The Audiencia of Seville has ordered the reopening of the cause of the training courses of the Junta de Andalucía by partially estimating the appeal filed by the PP-A against the order in which Judge María Núñez Bolaños filed the main part of the case, in which 24 people were investigated, among them several former Andalusian officials.
In a car notified to the parties on Monday, as reported by the High Court of Justice of Andalusia (TSJA), the First Section partially upheld the appeal of the PP-A against the order of the court issued by the judge on October 11 of 2016 and ratified on February 1, 2017 in the sense of ordering the practice of tests already admitted and not carried out.
The object is the presumed irregularities that could have been committed in the process of granting, managing, justifying and liquidating subsidies for training for employment by the Andalusian Employment Service (SAE) between 2009 and 2012.
The court also orders that the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard examine several subsidy files sealed by the UCO itself in the SAE to "compare the examinees already with the 'physical' files and check whether the same lack of documentation and defects that are highlighted, especially in the reports of the Intervention ".
The Chamber warns the PP-A that "if such proceedings do not give the result sought by the appellant, it will be completely inadmissible to continue the investigation."
In the car, against which there is no appeal, the Court states that "the crux of the matter is to clarify whether or not it is appropriate to revoke the dismissal because certain actions have not been carried out or others have been denied, but rather actions must be taken because With the material available in the case, the dismissal does not proceed. "
In his opinion, right now "there are not enough elements to decide if there is, as the prosecutor has argued, a situation of lack of control and mismanagement that does not go beyond the strict administrative scope or, on the contrary, a situation in which the system of control is that there was no control in practice, known and tolerated by those responsible. "
The court asserts that in this case "there are not enough indications about the existence of a plot or a concert between the investigated and third parties for an arbitrary distribution of public funds", nor "indications that the funds were distributed in an organized or planned manner. to a previous client network ".
On the other hand, the Hearing rejects the procedural grounds of the appeal filed by the PP-A to challenge the investigating judge number 6 for lack of impartiality, since the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) denied it, but "despite what has been answered from the CGPJ, the appellant stubbornly incomprehensible in its baseless argument, "criticizes the Chamber.
The PP-A alleged that the performance of the instructor in the interrogations was "captious", but the Chamber does not observe "absolutely nothing of what is said, unless we give as suggestive or suggestive that which appeals to the appellant at each moment", replica.
. (tagsToTranslate) Hearing (t) Sevilla (t) reopens (t) formation (t) Board