The former Valencian president says the investigation into the Ariel case, which is based on an “illegal agreement” between the anti-corruption prosecutor’s office, and Uruguayan businessman Fernando Belhote.
- Valencian Community Judge processes former president of the Generalitat Eduardo Zaplana for money laundering and criminal organization
- barren land issue The UCO certifies the looting that it has attributed to Zaplana through the agenda of its entire political life.
Eduardo Zaplana, the former president of the Valencian Generalitat, has filed an appeal against his prosecution in the so-called barren land issue Noting that the investigation has proved that “there is not a single evidence that he has accounts abroad” or that he has rigged public competitions to collect commissions.
Similarly, the former ‘popular’ minister also insisted that the investigation conducted by Court No. 8 of Valencia was full of irregularities and was based on an “illegal agreement” between the two. anti corruption prosecutor and Uruguayan businessmen Fernando Belhot, who has admitted to having committed the offense by laundering the Zaplana funds and has been ousted as a result of the above settlement. Even his condition went from investigation to witness and he did not even give a statement in the court in the presence of other lawyers in the case.
“Long prevailing instruction”, refers to a writing drawn up by a lawyer. Danielle Campos“Far from confirming the possible indications that justified the initiation of the case, it has served to substantiate ITV’s adjudication processes and my client’s alienation in relation to wind farms in the Valencian Community and that he was not the owner, authorized, Attorney-in-fact or beneficiary of funds attributed to him abroad”.
According to Zaplana’s appeal, the “if story”, in reference to the car that leaves him a step away from sitting on the bench, “does not describe what the prevailing resolution is, how we can defend ourselves, Can deny existence or justify it. Validity?”. “Of course, there is no proposal signed, either in summary or outside of it, with respect to ITV or the Valencian Community’s Alico plan.” “It is not possible for us to see how Mr. Zaplana could have been the author of the said crime,” attorney Campos abounds.
“We can be told that although he did not subscribe to any popular proposition, he could have been a motivator, a collaborator, or a collaborator,” he adds. It would be necessary to identify “but in this case, at least, the content author motivated”, an extreme that has not been done throughout the investigation, in the opinion of the former high-ranking PP officer of the Defense.
In the absence of direct evidence, Zaplana insisted that the “main incriminating evidence” against him lies in the testimony of Uruguayan Belhote, against whom the court initially issued an international arrest warrant to separate him from the anti-corruption prosecutor. It was canceled after being agreed to. His testimony preliminary and allegation on the former minister. “This evidence must have been obtained by a means that would be illegal in our law, as it derives from an agreement that guarantees impunity to an alleged participant,” the appeal states. “It is not possible in our legal system to confer punitive benefits in any case, including by guaranteeing the full immunity of a person who has allegedly participated in criminal acts.”
Zaplana also fights the element that formed the origin of the case against him and which was found in one of the searches made by the Civil Guard. In particular, the so-called ‘Syrian papers’, documents that the former manager of a public company Imelsa They said they were in possession of them after it was given to them by a citizen of Syrian nationality, who occupied a flat that belonged to Zaplana.
collection of commission
According to the Civil Guard, these reflect the ‘Syrian papers’ roadmap of the alleged collection of commissions from Zaplana in the hands of cottino family Through your business group. However, in the opinion of the lawyer for the former Valencian president, “photocopies of some typed documents, parts crossed out, showing unrelated data on the alleged companies” from which he dissociates himself entirely.
“What is indisputable is that no commission of offense has been deduced from the documents provided,” the appeal said. But also that Zaplana’s name “does not appear in the seized documents nor does it have any affiliation with the companies mentioned.” So “its connection to the documents is made through a bizarre story.”
Not in vain, “the dates of the said documents or their date of printing are after the sale and eviction of the house” which was in the former high “popular” status. “What does it matter? The case was to invent a cause by which Mr. Zaplana could be investigated and everything was worth it to achieve that goal,” he says. Also remember that the former manager of Imelsa, mark benaventhas recently changed its statement and statements World He explained that it was the prosecutor’s office and the civil guard who used them to illegally produce those documents in the case, insisting that they were not his and that he did not know their origins.
For all these reasons, Zaplana requests that the indictment against him be dropped and a case registered.
according to the norms of