The Court of Seville asks the Prosecutor's Office for a report on the suspension of Griñán prison

The ruling of the Supreme Court on the political part of the ERE case remains unexecuted a month after it was announced.

Thomas Osborne
Thomas Osborne
11 October 2022 Tuesday 13:31
4 Reads
The Court of Seville asks the Prosecutor's Office for a report on the suspension of Griñán prison

The ruling of the Supreme Court on the political part of the ERE case remains unexecuted a month after it was announced. Today, the Court of Seville has issued an order in which it asks the Prosecutor's Office and the accusations to report on the request for suspension of the prison sentences imposed by the ERE case on nine former senior officials of the Junta de Andalucía, including former president José Antonio Griñán, sentenced to six years in prison for embezzlement of public funds.

Regarding the six high-ranking officials punished with disqualification, as is the case of former President Manuel Chaves, Justice assumes that the sentence is final since it is issued and proceeds to its execution, although as for those that imply prison doubts arise. .

Let us remember that there are nine prisoners sentenced to prison and that each and every one of them have applied to the Ministry of Justice for a request for a partial pardon, a procedure that could suspend the execution of the sentence until it is resolved.

In the car, the First Section of the Provincial Court requires compliance with the sentence imposed on six other senior officials sentenced in November 2019 to disqualification, including former President Manuel Chaves and former councilors Gaspar Zarrías and Magdalena Álvarez. Its determination is based on what is stated in the Law of Criminal Procedure against sentences handed down in cassation, in this case by the Supreme Court, where it is stated that "no recourse is admitted", for which reason the sentence is final from the same day on which it is dictated and proceeds to its execution.

As for the nine sentenced to prison, the order requests that the documents presented be sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office and the accusations so that they report "on the request for suspension of the execution of the custodial sentence while the proposed pardons are processed." This affects, in addition to Griñán, other former councilors of the socialist governments of the Junta de Andalucía, such as Carmen Martínez Aguayo, Francisco Vallejo, José Antonio Viera or Antonio Fernández.

Against this resolution of the Court, one more step for the execution of the sentence, it is possible to appeal, which can be filed within a period of three days from its notification.

It was on September 1 when the family of José Antonio Griñán registered with the Ministry of Justice the request for a partial pardon for the former Andalusian president, sentenced to six years in prison for the crimes of prevarication and embezzlement, which is what implies the imprisonment. His request did not leave indifferent neither locals nor strangers. Many of the former leader's party colleagues publicly supported the family while others, such as the current general secretary of the PSOE-A, Juan Espadas, quickly disassociated themselves. Another 4,000 personalities from different fields, such as the world of culture or sports, also joined this petition. Of course, both the PP-A and the national leadership of the popular were against it.

The request for pardon, something that the rest of the convicts have also requested, is one more piece of the procedural strategy of Griñán, 76, to avoid being imprisoned, since his lawyer intends to open two other avenues, one in the Supreme Court, with an incident of annulment against the sentence, and another before the Constitutional Court arguing the violation of some fundamental right in order to request the total or partial suspension of the execution of the sentence.

The sentence, let us remember, was ratified this summer by the Supreme Court, in a sentence that had two dissenting votes against the conviction for embezzlement. The Supreme considered it proven that the nine former executive positions were aware of the irregular framework for the concession of social and labor aid for a decade (2000-2009) and that it produced a hole in the public coffers of more than 680 million, who acted knowingly of the "lack of control" and the "very serious illegalities" that were being committed, despite which they did nothing to prevent it.