The last four former senior officials of the Junta de Andalucía whose term to enter prison ended this Monday, convicted in the case of the fraudulent ERE, the former Minister of Innovation Francisco Vallejo, the former Vice Minister of Innovation Jesús María Rodríguez, the General Director of IFA -IDEA Miguel Ángel Serrano and the former Minister of Employment and Technological Development José Antonio Viera, entered the Sevilla I prison shortly after 6:00 p.m. They all arrived at the Sevillian prison two minutes before 6:00 p.m. They have accompanied them to a side parking lot of the prison, where they have said goodbye to them.
With a serious countenance, without making statements, and visibly moved especially Vallejo, who has put on a pair of sunglasses despite having already fallen in the afternoon, they have traveled alone the approximately 30 meters that separated them from the vehicles to enter the prison entrance office, after going up a small ramp, each with a handbag as their only luggage. The entrance coincided with the visiting hours of the prison and the return of the inmates who have been on leave during the Christmas holidays, so that the scene, together with the presence of the media, has raised some expectation in the jail parking lot
Now they will have to spend a few days in the admission module of the Seville prison and after being interviewed by the departments of psychology and social services, among others, they will be assigned the final department where they will serve their respective sentences.
Francisco Vallejo, former Minister of Innovation, is sentenced to seven years and one day and 18 years of disqualification for prevarication and embezzlement. Jesús María Rodríguez, who was Vice Minister of Innovation, is sentenced to six years in prison and 15 years of disqualification for prevarication and embezzlement, and Miguel Ángel Serrano, former general director of IDEA (the public company that granted the codinero pú) years and six months in prison and 17 months of disqualification for prevarication and embezzlement.
Recently, the First Section of the Court of Seville dismissed the appeals against the order dated November 15, in which this judicial instance already denied the initial requests for suspension of the prison sentences that weigh on the convicted. Such requests for suspension of prison sentences were mainly based on requests for partial pardon submitted by the convicts to the Ministry of Justice and the motions for annulment filed before the Supreme Court, which before its appeals against the initial conviction of the Prime Sición of the Hearing, fully guarantees the aforementioned prison sentences except in the case of former Labor Director Juan Márquez, with respect to whom he reduced the prison sentence from seven years and one day in prison to three years, when appreciating the mitigation dedicated to reparation of the damage
Griñán’s defense, specifically, requested an extension of “three months” in the ten-day period set for his voluntary entry into prison, to “avoid compliance (of the prison sentence) that could be unsuccessful, improper or necessary unfair”. Within this framework, in the order that is the object of these appeals against the denial of the requests for suspension of the prison sentences of the convicted persons, the First Section of the Hearing admitted “the lack of criminal records of the convicted persons”, but for Another part pointed out “the seriousness and length of the sentences, which prevents the suspension of the execution.”
Nothing “advises” to suspend prison sentences
“There is no circumstance that advises the suspension of the sentence by request for pardon” give rise to the suspension of the execution of the custodial sentences imposed in a final sentence”, since this “would imply a breach of the precepts that regulate the suspension of the execution of the sentences and the effective fulfillment of the same”.
As for Juan Márquez, sentenced to three years in prison, the panel argued that “his situation is different, the sentence being three and four years less than that of the rest, which together with the lack of a criminal record and objective reasons that determined a quantitative penological reduction in the sentence handed down by the TS, are circumstances to take into account so that it proceeds, for a prudential time of one year, to the suspension of the execution of the custodial sentence while the pardon is being processed” .
“Questions already resolved”
In this sense, in response to the appeals, the Court stated in its new order that they “raise issues already resolved in the appealed order and there is no data or circumstance that allows the resolution issued to be amended”, which “sufficiently substantiates the “denial of the suspension” of prison sentences “Not in vain, the duration of the trial sessions lasted for a year, given the complexity of the matter, in addition to the time necessary for the drafting of the sentence,” they highlighted in the magistrates in their new order, concluding that “the passage of time is not a reason for granting the requested suspension” and thus ratifying the contested order.
However, the defense of José Antonio Griñán alleged that he had recently been diagnosed with a serious illness, requesting again the suspension of the term of imprisonment with respect to this defendant, according to this reason. Given this, and after seeing the medical documentation provided by the representation of Griñán, the First Section of the Hearing ordered that a forensic from the Institute of Medicine produce a report “assessing whether admission to the penitentiary center could have an impact on the development of the disease or in the prescribed treatment”.