The Provincial Court of Madrid rejected last October the complaint presented by Vox for the dismissal of Colonel Diego Pérez de los Cobos as head of the Madrid Civil Guard Command by not appreciating the crime of prevarication in the actions of the general director of the Armed Institute, María Gámez, nor of the Secretary of State for Security, Rafael Pérez.
The National Court forces the Interior to reinstate Colonel Pérez de los Cobos, who was dismissed for not reporting on the 8M investigation
In the order of the Provincial Court of October 15, to which Europa Press has had access, the magistrates explained that this type of conflict must be resolved in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction and considered that “it was unfounded to open a criminal investigation “. “And even less to carry out speculative investigation procedures in order to verify the possible existence of other crimes,” they pointed out.
The Office of the Prosecutor supported that no criminal case be opened against the ministerial department, an idea that the magistrates share because the possible illegality of an administrative act, even of a serious nature or that entails its invalidity, does not mean that there is a crime of prevarication. “It is not enough the mere illegality or contradiction with the law, whose control corresponds to the contentious-administrative jurisdictional order,” the magistrates pointed out about the possibility of imputing a crime to those responsible for the Ministry of the Interior, as requested by Vox.
The dismissal of the colonel is currently pending the resolution issued by the National Court following the appeal recently presented by the Ministry of the Interior before the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of this other judicial body after the Central Court of Contentious- Administrative 8 will annul and nullify his dismissal by considering “illegal” the motivation put forward by Interior.
According to that ruling, the colonel fulfilled his obligation by not reporting the 8M investigations, which affected the then government delegate in Madrid, José Manuel Franco, because the instructor in that case had imposed a duty of reserve on him. In the termination resolution signed by the director of the Civil Guard, María Gámez, it was indicated that the reason for the termination had been Pérez de los Cobos’ refusal to report on ongoing investigations.
In its appeal, the State Attorney insists that the department headed by Fernando Grande Marlaska dismissed the colonel from the freely appointed position he held as a result of a “loss of confidence” for not agreeing with his way of “proceeding” and denies that this administrative authority was used “for a purpose other than that legally envisaged.”
The appeal sets out the reasons that, according to the Interior, led him to lose confidence in the colonel and opposes the fact that, in the case of a position that requires the utmost confidence, total freedom cannot be exercised from the executive power at the time of the dismissal. “The sufficiency of a behavior to generate a loss of trust cannot be subject to judicial control, since, otherwise, the subjective conditions determining trust would be controlled,” it can be read in the brief.
Interior insists in that letter that the reason for the dismissal was the loss of confidence for failing to report “relevant incidents” and whose communication “does not constitute any violation of the applicable legislation or the orders of the magistrate.” In fact, he assures that the colonel reported incidents up to four times without raising any objection and “unilaterally changed his behavior for some reason.”