The Provincial Court closes the way to investigate Aguirre by the Puerta de Hierro Hospital
The Third Section of the Provincial Court of Madrid also sees no reason to charge former regional president Esperanza Aguirre for managing the beds at the Puerta de Hierro Hospital,
a diligence requested by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor and that was denied by the instructor of the case, Mónica Aguirre. Considers, like the judge, that a person cannot be cited only because of the position of responsibility that he or she held.
In a resolution to which ABC had access, the court thus rejects the direct appeal filed by Anticorruption when the instructor denied her claims, which also included citing as defendants the former Minister of Health Juan José Güemes and the former Deputy Minister of Health Assistance Anna Sanchez.
The magistrates agree with the investigating judge that “the mere fact” that Aguirre was president of the Community of Madrid and Güemes, his adviser on the dates of the events, is not sufficient reason to cite them as defendants, as imposed by the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court on “the prohibition of objective attributions of responsibility” only because of the position or position that a person holds.
The investigation is followed by the change from double rooms to single rooms at the Puerta de Hierro Hospital, located in the Madrid town of Majadahonda, for which it was rreduced its capacity by 135 beds without following the administrative channels planned and causing an economic loss to the Community of Madrid, which continued to pay for them.
The investigation dates back to November 2020, when the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office filed a complaint against Elena de Mingo, who was the General Director of Planning, Infrastructure and Sanitary Equipment under the government of Esperanza Aguirre in Madrid.
As summarized by the Provincial Court, “he was specifically accused of knowing of the illegality and absolutely omitting the slightest procedure modification of contracts provided for in current legislation and in the administrative clauses, proceeded to de facto modify the public works concession contract» transforming those 135 rooms into individual rooms.
For that modification, which was ordered in May 2008, a resolution issued by the general directorate that commanded “dictated at the request of the president” Esperanza Aguirre, was invoked “as supporting justification”, a resolution that, as the magistrates recall, “never existed.” Anti-corruption maintains that aside from this, the economic balance of the contract should have been restored in favor of the Administration and it was not done. Appreciates a crime of administrative prevarication in competition with another of embezzlement.
The two investigated assumed their management
During her statement as an investigator, the former general director assumed the proposal for modification, which was issued “in the context of the commissioning” of the hospital and “in view of the fact that the rest of the hospitals had double rooms for individual use.” “In any case, she pointed out that it was a modification project, like 43 previous orders, signed by herself and that it was transferred to the Madrid Health Service as a contracting body,” collects the Provincial Court.
Meanwhile, the former general director of Economic Management and Purchases of health products of the community of Madrid, Jesús Alejandro Vidart, also investigated, «assumed the action carried out itself, which was explained at length, denying having received instructions from his superiors, without deferring responsibility to third parties, reiterating having followed the technical criteria established before his arrival at the post.
«Despite the statement given by the defendant, who explained her actions assuming her management, without having acted by order of the president of the Community and without deriving responsibility from third parties, the Public Prosecutor considers it necessary for Esperanza Aguirre to appear as an investigator in order to formally direct the procedure against her”, says the Provincial Court. She leans like this, for denying that she is cited as accused.