The Madrid Court confirms the filing of the Vox complaint over the disturbances at the Vallecas rally

Endorses the decision by not seeing evidence of crime in the events attributed to Pablo Iglesias and Juan Carlos Monedero, among others

MADRID, 31 Ene. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Provincial Court of Madrid has confirmed the file of the complaint that Vox presented against the Government delegate in Madrid, Mercedes González Fernández, the former leader of Podemos Pablo Iglesias and the co-founder of the 'morada' formation Juan Carlos Monedero, among others, for the riots that took place in April 2021 during a pre-campaign act by those of Santiago Abascal in the Madrid district of Vallecas.

Vox had accused González Fernández of alleged crimes of prevarication, omission to prosecute crimes, injuries and damages. For his part, he had attributed alleged crimes of incitement to public disorder to Iglesias and Monedero because they would have published messages "contrary" to the call on social networks.

The party alleged that various incidents occurred during the event and that unidentified individuals assaulted the participants. He further argued that the established police device was inadequate and that this lack of adaptation was voluntarily decided by the Government Delegate and by a police chief against whom the complaint is also directed.

The Investigating Court Number 8 of Madrid decided not to admit the complaint and Vox, dissatisfied with the decision, filed an appeal for reform, but was unsuccessful. Faced with this scenario, the formation went to the Provincial Court of Madrid to protest against the file.

Now, the magistrates of the Seventh Section of this Hearing have dismissed Vox's appeal. In a sentence, to which Europa Press has had access, they have ensured that the judge's decision was duly motivated and that it did not create any defenselessness for the party.

"It is not true that the resolution issued by the Investigating Court is not duly motivated. Both in the contested order, and in the one in which the appeal for reform is dismissed, the Investigator analyzes the facts that are the subject of the complaint and exposes in a manner succinct, although sufficient, the reasons to conclude in the terms that we have exposed. A different issue is that such reasoning, as is otherwise legitimate, does not satisfy the complainant", has indicated the Madrid Court.

The magistrates have defended that proceedings were carried out in the Investigating Court to "find out the identity of the possible perpetrators of the crimes mentioned in the complaint" and that the decision of the titular judge was to archive the case.

Within the framework of the resolution, the Madrid Court has ruled on the crimes of "incitement" to public disorder that are attributed to Monedero and Iglesias. On this point, he has assured that the complaint does not make any allegation that supports said accusation.

The court has also ruled on the alleged hate crime that Vox blames on Monedero and has stressed that the message he published on social networks "reveals an ideological discrepancy between the convening group and its author, and is an incitement to their possible followers to show this same discrepancy".

The magistrates, however, have stressed that "no reference is made to incitement to violence, although certainly to the expression of a political disparity with the complainant party." "We do not appreciate in the conduct of Monedero a form of incitement to hatred, hostility or violence in the aforementioned terms," ​​they added.

Regarding Iglesias, Vox assured that some of the people arrested in the riots could be employees of Podemos. Those of Santiago Abascal considered that the then leader of the formation had encouraged the incidents that occurred.

"At this point, the appellant does nothing more than speculate regarding the participation 'on the intellectual level' of Iglesias, which she seems to consider as an inducer of the violent acts attributed to the aforementioned individuals. No element of evidence, not even initial, is contributes, and the articulated reasoning is based on a mere suspicion, if not on the plaintiff's suspicion alone", the Court has settled.

On the sidelines, the magistrates have stressed that the facts that Vox attributes to the Government Delegate in Madrid and a police chief -- that is, the allegedly having established an inadequate police force -- "do not constitute" a crime of prevarication and/or omission to prosecute crimes.