The prosecutor endorses the filing of the case against Colau for subsidies to related entities

The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor does not oppose the file of the open case against the mayor of Barcelona, ​​Ada Colau, for the subsidies granted to related entities. The public accusation maintains that the proceedings carried out do not intuit the commission of any crime and that “it is convenient to banish the temptation to attribute possible criminal responsibilities” to the mayor “on the flimsy argument” of being the maximum responsible of the Barcelona City Council, ” thus justifying a kind of vicarious liability based on an extensive presumption” that, in his opinion, “lacks procedural and criminal foundation and justification.” In this way, the prosecutor endorses the file request presented by the defense lawyers Olga Tubau and Àlex Solà. The complaint was filed by the Association for Transparency and Democratic Quality.

In his brief, the prosecutor highlights that the “warnings” by the delegated auditor of the consistory about some of these subsidies “do not reach the level of suspensive objection” (reason for paralyzing the file) and have the value only of “observations & rdquor; . Therefore, as the intervener stated in her statement, “the fact that the administrative body receiving her observation did not assume its content does not imply any illegality, so the administrative decision” cannot be considered “prevaricating”. At this point, he stresses that in all this “the only one investigated in this case has nothing to do with it”, Ada Colau, who, moreover, “does not dictate a single resolution -arbitrary or not- in the administrative files investigated”, nor, consequently, “he can do it knowing his injustice.”

From the point of view of omission, the prosecutor states that “neither can we consider that Colau’s non-intervention” “acquires criminal overtones”, given that the delegation of powers in matters of subsidies excludes “not only the responsibility for the absence of an action that, on the other hand, was not required of him”, but also “the position of guarantor” and “the possibility of avoiding a result on which, moreover, there is not the slightest indication of criminal unlawfulness”.

past activist

Anti-corruption stresses that “link the activist past” of Colau with the grants awarded, for example, to the Observatory of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ODESC) or with the Platform for People Affected by Mortgages (PAH) “is nothing more than an exercise in imagination lacking the most basic foundation that support the continuation of the research carried out so far”. The acceptance of this theory “would give rise to, among other consequences, an unfair exclusion of the affected entities as candidates to receive a subsidy based on the new political status of one of its members.” The entities that received the funds, he stresses, “did not benefit” from “favorable treatment.”

Related news

In his opinion, “it makes no legal sense to prolong the investigation of this case given that its purpose is clearly delimited by the facts described in the complaint: the supposedly criminal connection of the investigated [Colau] with the granting of very specific subsidies processed in files” in favor of certain “fully identified” entities. It adds that “without going into the legal classification proposed by the popular accusation [la Asociación por la Transparencia]”the truth is that, excluding” prevarication [dictar una resolución injusta a sabiendas]”the rest of the proposed criminal types decline, as they all bring cause from an initial and illegal action denied” by the mayor.

.