Regarding the request for revocation, the judges rejected on the grounds that "... sharing or not the arguments of Judge to quo, I must say that your car is driven, contains an account of facts, but does not detail the outcome of investigations, said the sub judice rule to the parties (under Article 302, paragraph two, of the Act Criminal Procedure) - yes reproduce the content of the complaint (. ..) mentions expressly crimes under investigation - prevarication, bribery, influence peddling, fraud and charges illegal, prohibited negotiations to officials, embezzlement of public funds and money laundering, and sets out in understandable and folding, as evidenced by the five appeals filed, the legal grounds on which it bases its decision ... .
As for the inhibition rejected Judging instance, means the Section 8 to be aware of the Courts of Oviedo because, after investigations by the Justice Gijón be investigated alleged crimes under investigation were made in the Asturian capital. In fact, " because of all the crimes investigated the crime that has indicated a higher penalty is to embezzlement of public funds-up to 8 years imprisonment ( art. 432.2 of the Penal Code) - and this crime could only be committed in Oviedo that is where its headquarters are disappointed the Administration (The Principality of Asturias), where three of the accused persons (Jose-Luis Iglesias Riopedre , María-Jesús Otero and Marta Rebollada Rene Aviles) and where necessarily the alleged payments were arranged so that the standard is that of No. 1 of paragraph 1. "Furthermore, against reasoning the judge to quo ," because even if a crime of bribery was committed in Gijón , as is the judge of first instance - and everyone else had been committed elsewhere in Asturias (to our knowledge, evidence that any of the investigated crimes committed outside the province), Judge competent judicial party would be the headquarters of the Provincial Court for , Oviedo (Article 80.1 of the Organic Law of Judicial Power), the town where further crimes are consummated embezzlement of public funds (As above) of prevarication (because the alleged arbitrary and unfair decisions had to be taught in Oviedo , seat of government in which Jose-Luis Iglesias Riopedre , María-Jesús Otero Rebollada and Marta Renedo Avilés exercised the functions of their office) and fraud and illegal charges (because the alleged contracts had to authorize Oviedo and the alleged fraud had to take place in Oviedo , home Administration disappointed) . "These arguments have its purpose in the provisions of art . 18 of the Act Criminal Procedure:
" 1. Judges and courts are competent, by order, to hear cases related offenses:
-
The land on which committed the crime to be designated penalty.
-
who shall begin the first case in the event that a crime is referred to as penalty.
-
The fact that the Assize Court or the Supreme Court in designate respective cases when the causes were begun at the same time, or fails to show which began first.
2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, shall have jurisdiction to hear related crimes committed by two or more people in different places, had preceded this concerto, in preference to those indicated in the previous section, the court in the judicial district headquarters for Provincial Court, provided that the various crimes were committed in the territory of one province and at least one of them had committed within the judicial district headquarters for Provincial Court. "Exposed
foregoing, it should be noted that" If when proceedings were initiated after the filing of the complaint filed in Gijón by AVF on February 9, 2010, pursuant to Article 15 of the Act Criminal Procedure ("When no evidence of where you have committed a misdemeanor or felony, will be judges and Tribunals where necessary to hear the case or trial: 1 The city boundaries, party or constituency in which they have discovered evidence of the crime ... "), rule invoked in the contested order was fully justified the jurisdiction of the Court of Instruction No. 4 of Gijon , because they know what crime or crimes in question, where were committed, what people had participated, and so on., "Therefore, the Court considers that while the competence of the Court Gijón was founded at the beginning, once found out what crimes could be committed, and it makes no sense to continue taking investigation of the cause, especially taking into account the above mentioned reasoning.
Related article:
OPERATION TIDE: alleged corruption IN ASTURIAS
0 comments:
Post a Comment