The judge of the National Court Manuel García Castellón has agreed in the framework of the Tandem operation the summons as investigated of Repsol SA and Caixbank SA as legal persons for the crime of bribery and the crime of revealing secrets for their alleged participation in the contracting of the retired commissioner Jose Manuel Villarejo to carry out an investigation on the president of Sacyr, Luis del Rivero and his surroundings.
The judge requires Repsol and Caixabank to appoint a representative, as well as a lawyer and solicitor to carry out the appearance in which the representatives of the two companies will be informed of the facts attributed to them. Once said appearance has been held, the head of the Central Court of Instruction 6 makes an appointment to take a statement from the representative appointed by Repsol, SA and Caixabank SA on July 26, 2021 at 10 a.m.
In a car, García Castellón indicates that at this time of the investigation carried out within the framework of separate piece number 21 It is incidentally proven that both companies, through their security officers, made a direct order to Villarejo, when he was on active duty in the National Police Corps to investigate Luis del Rivero and his entourage.
This investigation would have been used, continues the magistrate, to frustrate the pact that Luis del Rivero, through Sacyr, had reached with the Mexican company Pemex to take control of Repsol SA, a company in which Caixabank SA was the reference shareholder. In the same way, the judge considers incidentally proven that both companies, acting jointly, accessed the traffic of telephone calls made by Luis del Rivero and people around him. This conduct would constitute a crime of discovery and disclosure of secrets.
The judge also considers incidentally accredited a second commission carried out in 2014 by the investigated, in their capacity as managers of Repsol, SA -without participation on this occasion by Caixabank, SA- to Cenyt, SA, “when the investigated José Manuel Villarejo was on active duty in the National Police Force, referring to the need to certify that a certain manager had been absent without just cause from a scheduled meeting of the committee of which he was a member “.
Invoices paid by mercantile companies
The magistrate explains in his letter that in order to charge a legal person, in accordance with article 31 bis.1 of the Penal Code, the crime is required to be committed for the direct or indirect benefit of the entity. In the specific case, the order indicates that the invoices issued by Villarejo in execution of the investigation work commissioned were paid by Caixabank and Repsol, “showing that the actions of those investigated were carried out at all times in the name and on behalf of the company itself ”.
The judge appreciates doubts about the diligence used by the two entities in hiring the services of Villarejo and for this he highlights two extremes: the legality of the contracted service and the status of Jose Manuel Villarejo as a public official. Both Caixabank and Repsol at the time sent documentation in which both alluded to the legality of the hiring of the Cenyt company, justifying it in the conviction that it was private security services.
Lack of due diligence
The judge appreciates a serious failure in the due diligence to verify that, as ABC advanced, Cenyt was never authorized to carry out private security activities as it is a check that can be carried out through the Central Private Security Unit of the National Police.
For the magistrate, It is especially striking that this check was not carried out when the two heads of Security of Repsol and Caixabank that hired Villarejo had been head of the Central Private Security Unit of the National Police (in the case of the Repsol Head of Security) and superior head of Police in Galicia and Catalonia in the case of the head of Security of Caixabank.
He adds that both, although they were not active, they had to know the rank of the members of the National Police Corps to know that Jose Manuel Villarejo worked as a policeman active when the two companies investigated hired their services.
García Castellón concludes that the lack of due diligence of these two companies, with an impact on the criminal outcome investigated requires, “the less that the responsible entities explain in court why this situation could have occurred ”.