He is credited with signing the contract against auditors’ objections during his time as mayor of San Cristóbal de la Laguna.
A court in San Cristóbal de la Laguna (Tenerife) has asked the Supreme Court to open an investigation into the bias of the former Canary Islands president and current senator. Fernando Clavijo, The reasoned statement sent to the High Court – the only judicial instance that can impeach a senator – follows the opinion of the prosecutor in the case, which sees evidence of guilt in the actions of the Secretary General of the Canary Coalition in his time as the Mayor of La Laguna. (2008-2015).
has been decided under case repair, which takes its name from the origin of the alleged criminal activity: ignoring objections raised by municipal auditors to the signing of various contracts. According to the investigation, reports of “definitely opposed” extension or continuation of contracts were ignored by Clavijo’s decision.
“The facts examined,” said the brief sent to the High Court, “could constitute a continuing offense of administrative bias that the Mayor of the Municipality of San Cristóbal during 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.” As was allegedly done by Mr. Clavijo, the objections drawn up by de la Laguna and the municipal intervention would have been in a repetitive manner and without being subject to the administrative procedure with reference to the rules governing the administrative contract of the municipalities should do”.
Judge in 130-page document Ana Serrano-Jover Exposes negative reports from contracts and auditors, which pointed to a number of irregularities. These ranged from expanding contracts when they had already expired or signing new contracts with the absence of fundamental requirements such as setting a price or explicitly setting its purpose. They also resorted to presenting minor expenses in the form of contracts, which were away from various controls.
20 years of politician
After reviewing Clavizo’s political career, the judge concluded that with his own experience he should know very well the scope of his actions. “We are dealing with a person who has held various positions in public administration for almost 20 years, so it is very difficult to think that he is unaware that the basic pillar of administrative contract is freedom of access to tenders. Respect the principles of advertising, transparency, discrimination and equal treatment as in the year 2022 we can say that any average citizen knows it”
“We also understand that it is difficult for a person in his or her professional career to be unaware that the issue of the duration of contracts is one of the principles on which the law of contract is based, except as agreed upon or provided for. Contracts are certainly are not made by the same company”, he added.
The letter recalls that the extensions represented an economic loss for the municipality, as a rule was approved indicating that, given the difficult financial situation, new tenders would be priced between 15% and 20%. The amount should be reduced. With the contract extension system, these savings are avoided. “I knew it could damage the municipal treasury,” says the judge.
The letter to the Supreme Court concludes by recalling that opposition councilors in various plenary sessions had warned them about what was happening and that a quarter of the budget was spent on auditors’ objections. Criminal case opened on the complaint of PSOE councilor Santiago PresiWho today, like Clavijo, is a senator by autonomous appointment.
Now the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court must decide whether there is enough evidence to launch an investigation against the senator. An offense of prejudice detected by a judge and prosecutor’s office “punishes that authority or public official who, knowing his injustice, will determine an arbitrary solution in an administrative matter.” The prevailing resolution will be dozens of decrees with which it overcomes the objections of technicians.
Excluding public employment or office specifically punishable with a fine of between nine and 15 years. If convicted, it would mean the loss of his current senator position. Clavizo was already in the hands of the Supreme Court for another investigation – the Grass case, but his charge was eventually dismissed by the High Court.
according to the norms of