The Supreme Court inadmises a complaint against Ayuso for the ‘Avalmadrid case’

The Supreme Court has rejected a complaint filed against the president of the Community of Madrid, Isabel Diaz Ayuso, for what is known as the ‘Avalmadrid case’. The granting of a loan of 400,000 euros by this regional public entity to the company MC INFORTÉCNICA, linked to the president’s family, on the understanding that she did not intervene in any way in the process.

The Free Association of Lawyers complains against Díaz Ayuso in the Supreme Court for the uprising of assets

The Free Association of Lawyers complains against Díaz Ayuso in the Supreme Court for the uprising of assets

Know more

The complaint It had been filed by the Free Association of Lawyers (ALA) and accused Díaz Ayuso of participating in the operation so that the Administration could not claim an apartment from his family that he had inherited as payment for this loan. A loan of almost half a million that his parents never repaid.

The criminal court, with Miguel Colmenero as speaker and following the criterion of the Prosecutor’s Office, chooses not to admit the complaint and explains that there are no indications against her: “She was not a member of MC Infortécnica; there is no record that she knew her economic and corporate situation; she did not intervene in the credit or guarantee operation; she was not a guarantor or debtor; there is no evidence that he was aware of the debt, and there is no indication that he acted in collusion with the other defendants to avoid paying the debt of that company. ”

Díaz Ayuso had nothing to do with the loan of 400,000 euros and neither with a supposed subsequent strategy so that his parents did not have to repay the loan. The Supreme Court says that “there is no indication that, on the date it is carried out, it knew that MC Infortécnica was not going to comply with the obligations derived from the credit operation, nor that it had difficulties in doing so or that, more or less definitively, could not do so in the near future. ”

The complaint, therefore, is archived although the Supreme Court does not close the door to be able to investigate the possible role of Díaz Ayuso in the future if a judicial investigation of the non-gauged people left suspicions about their actions. It is inadmissible, they say, “without prejudice to what is appropriate at the time, if the investigation has been initiated in relation to the other defendants who have not been registered, there will be consistent indications of criminal responsibility against the person registered.”


Source link