Mónica Oltra, accused of the alleged cover-up of her ex-husband's abuse of a minor under guardianship

The TSJ sees "plural indications" that make "suspicion" of a "concert" to protect the educator or the political career of the vice president

The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV) has charged the Vice President of the Generalitat Valenciana and Minister of Inclusive Policies, Mónica Oltra, for the alleged cover-up of sexual abuse of her ex-husband to a minor tutored. She will testify on July 6.

This has been decided by the Chamber, a court to which the Investigating Court number 15 of Valencia sent the proceedings last April, estimating that there were allegedly criminal acts attributed to Oltra.

The case was sent to this body due to the Minister's condition of appraisal. After receiving the proceedings, the court asked the parties to the procedure --accusations and defenses-- about the competence to instruct the case. The Prosecutor's Office ruled in favor of the TSJCV assuming it for seeing "relevant" evidence against Oltra.

Specifically, this procedure investigates the alleged cover-up of the sexual abuse suffered in a center by a 14-year-old minor at the hands of Oltra's ex-husband between 2016 and 2017.

The educator was sentenced to five years in prison in a resolution ratified by the TSJCV. After the sentence, the minor denounced the situation in which she had found herself during the processing of the case and from the court a new judicial investigation was opened against six officials, the director and a psychologist of the shelter for minors where the events occurred .

Subsequently, five more people were charged: a general director, a deputy general director, a territorial secretary, a service manager and a technician. A total of 13 investigated.

The Chamber, after studying the case, has declared itself competent to instruct him by appreciating "a series of plural indications" that "lead to suspect the possible existence of a concert" between the appraised and various officials to "protect her then partner or protect the political career of the aforada", as stated in an order notified to the parties today.

The TSJCV therefore understands that it is appropriate to initiate preliminary proceedings, of which the rapporteur of this resolution, magistrate Antonio Ferrer, will be the instructor, "in order to investigate to what extent that initial suspicion has sufficient entity to allow the process can continue its normal course.

The Chamber assumes the case in its entirety, that is, also in relation to the other 13 investigated, among which are senior officials of the Ministry and workers of the juvenile center where the events occurred, considering that there is at this time in all of them "an inseparable connection".

In the order, it is pointed out that the different procedures and files carried out within the Ministry, "considered in the abstract and in an isolated way", may not be understood as illegal and even irregular, but it specifies that, if they are valued as a whole and are related to their content and timing, "suggests that they have been prepared with a very specific purpose, completely removed from the purpose for which they were conceived, since, according to the instructor, all of them are linked directly for a very precise purpose, already of very dubious legality, which is to benefit the procedural situation of Mrs. Oltra's husband, or simply try to protect her political career, even when this is done to the detriment of a minor protected by the Ministry of Equality".

The Chamber states that it is "true that there is no direct evidence linking these unique procedures with the appraised person", but adds that "there are several indications, which in principle suggest that they were orchestrated precisely for that purpose, both by the person whom they would directly benefit as well as because of the relationship they present with the evolution of the criminal process that they tried to hinder".

"Not being able to forget that it is peacefully admitted by our jurisprudence, both from our Supreme Court and our Constitutional Court, that this type of evidence is perfectly admissible to distort the presumption of innocence of a person," he points out.

In addition, to this it should be added that there are a series of public statements made by Oltra, both within Les Corts and before the media, in which the order for the initiation of the reserved file is attributed.

Although the vice president "may be trying to disassociate from her previous statements, it does not stop being an element to consider," the magistrates point out.

"CERTAINLY AMAZING"

"As it is also -they continue-- that it is certainly incredible that, as some of those investigated affirm, they found out about the abuses and the possible accusation of who turned out to be Mrs. Oltra's husband by the press, when I affirm that due to a desire for transparency at the beginning of his mandate, he communicated in the Ministry, both orally and in writing, "his relationship with this person and his work as an educator. "Which makes us think that it was a perfectly known circumstance in that area," they stress.

Regarding the fact that the conviction of the educator is pending an appeal before our Supreme Court, the Chamber explains that it may prevent talking about a crime of cover-up in the future.

But on the other hand, they point out, "it will not prevent us from assessing the crimes charged by the Public Prosecutor's Office, since ultimately it simply refers to preventing an investigation, not giving the minor the due protection that their particular position imposed on them, infraction that he could also attend even if he was finally acquitted, since what is transcendent is the screen arranged in order to avoid contributing to the due investigation of the facts and protect the minor as was his duty, avoiding the secondary victimization that has caused the treatment that was given to his complaint".

"Without forgetting --they add-- the consequences that the different resolutions adopted could have in criminal matters, which in their case could be understood as constituting the crime of prevarication of article 404 imputed by the Public Prosecutor, or simply a crime of improper misappropriation of article 432 in relation to article 252, to the extent that they may have involved an improper use of public resources for private purposes".

Therefore, in short, the Chamber believes it is appropriate to initiate some preliminary proceedings in order to investigate to what extent the initial suspicion has sufficient entity to allow the process to continue its ordinary course.