The Popular Party, Vox, UPN and different far-right organizations that make up the popular accusation in the Koldo case of the National Court have asked Judge Ismael Moreno to expel the PSOE from this unified action after the magistrate has agreed to investigate the indications of irregularities in the party's cash payments that the Supreme Court has sent him. In the letter to the court of the popular accusation it is stated that the PSOE has opposed such a measure.
“I cannot exercise the popular accusation who is an investigation object in the same case. It is incompatible for a person under investigation to act as a popular accusation, since this would imply a contradiction with the purpose of the figure and could affect the impartiality and the proper development of the criminal process,” allege the aforementioned organizations and parties in the document sent to the National Court, to which elDiario.es has had access.
The popular accusation has a legal direction, assigned by the court itself, which fell to the Popular Party. In the letter in which they request the expulsion of the PSOE, said address alludes to the order of Judge Leopoldo Puente, of the Supreme Court, “on possible cash payments made by the PSOE” to Jose Luis Ábalos, in his time as Secretary of Organization and Minister of Transport, and his advisor in the Ministry, Koldo García, which “would not be reflected in the official information provided by the party” in the case that is being followed in the high court.
The far-right parties and organizations, among them Clean Hands, add that the Supreme Court finds “indications of possible irregularities or criminal conduct” and that Judge Puente justifies that the National Court should be the one to investigate because “the possible responsibility of the party is not inseparably linked to Ábalos's legal status”, which is why there is an open case in the high court.
Supreme Court Judge Leopoldo Puente set out in his order the hypothesis that the PSOE participated in the laundering of funds from illicit activities allegedly committed by its former Organization Secretary José Luis Ábalos and his former advisor in the Ministry of Transport Koldo García. In the resolution, the judge sent the evidence collected to the National Court because he considers that the judge who in this court is investigating the Koldo case is competent for its investigation.
Puente's statements came after having heard the former PSOE manager and a PSOE employee testify as witnesses. As deduced from their testimonies, and from the documentation voluntarily provided by the party last Friday, Puente stated that it was not “verified” whether the expenses for which a refund was requested had been previously paid by card or in cash. Consequently, the judge pointed out that the party could not verify whether money of “illicit or even criminal” origin was being “laundered.”
In the order, the Supreme Court judge related the issues that, in his opinion, were not clarified after the statements of Ferraz's former manager and worker. Thus, he highlighted that after the interrogations neither of them made it clear “who the person was and what the procedure for cash compensation for invoices presented.” Puente also focused on the “non-verification” by the PSOE that the person who claimed reimbursement of expenses was the one who had made them according to the tickets or invoices provided.
The magistrate added that, after the testimonies of the aforementioned PSOE officials, the reasons that advised that the compensation of expenses be made in cash were not sufficiently explained, “at what moment did this procedure begin, if it had not always been this way, and at what moment did it definitively cease, if it ceased.”
The PSOE previously recorded a document in which it detailed the cash payments since 2017 to Ábalos, Koldo García, Santos Cerdán and the Organization Secretariat of the training to settle certain supposedly justified expenses. The party acknowledged that it managed almost one million euros in cash for all types of training expenses during the years covered by the Supreme Court investigation (2017-2024). All of these funds came from its official account, funded by the legal subsidies received by the party.
