The Supreme exonerates the former senior officials of the Board of the fraud of the training courses

• Macrocause The fraud of the training courses of the Board: millionaire funds without controls

• Trial Former senior officials of the Board disassociate themselves from fraud and the 'plugs' in the Almonte consortium that taught courses with subsidies

• Corruption The 'queen' Melchor of course fraud paid astronomical salaries to her son and nephew for 'ghost' tasks

The various judicial investigations that are underway on the alleged fraud of the training courses could take a turn, according to the

of the Supreme Court (TS).

The interpretation of the TS could benefit the former high officials of the Junta de Andalucía, who during the PSOE's time in power, granted and paid millions in subsidies without controlling the courses.

Despite the obvious irregularities that were committed with the subsidized courses, the conduct of the former high officials of the Board would not be criminal and, therefore, they could be acquitted or not even sit on the bench, if the criteria of the High Court.

The Anti-Corruption prosecutor Fernando Soto dropped that thesis in the trial that is being held at the Seville Court on the fraud of the courses in the

de Almonte Consortium, in which four people have been prosecuted, including Ana María Orihuela, the manager of the consortium, former socialist councilor of Almonte and also known as

, since she diverted funds from the formation to the parade of the Three Kings of her town in which she herself embodied King Melchor.

In this trial, the former high officials of the Board who were supposed to control and supervise this consortium did not even sit on the bench and only testified

in the oral hearing, despite the fact that the defendants repeatedly pointed out that they knew of all the irregularities that were committed there.

Ana María Orihuela, former manager of the Formades Consortium, characterized as Reina Melchor in the Almonte cavalcade. THE WORLD

One of the reasons for the exoneration of these former senior officials must be found in a ruling of the Administrative Litigation Chamber, Fourth Section, of the TS dated March 6, 2018, to which EL MUNDO had access.

In it, the TS obliges the Board to pay 25% of a subsidy for courses to an entity that had already received 75% of it.

With these aids, the Administration initially paid 75% and the remaining 25% when part of the justifications were presented.

The TS understands that the remaining 25% must be paid, even though the Board had not

of all the aid files.

The Supreme maintains that, when the Administration grants a subsidy, it must pay 100%, meeting the deadlines.

And, once paid, you could check whether or not the beneficiary has met the requirements.

And if he had not complied with them, he could initiate "a file for reduction or reimbursement in case of non-compliance," says the sentence.

Prosecutor Soto gave an example of this in the trial of the Formades Consortium.

When a citizen submits his Treasury declaration and returns it, the Administration immediately returns the money.

This does not prevent you from finding

, opening an inspection and claiming the corresponding money or fines later on.

Sources from the Prosecutor's Office indicated to this newspaper that, in the case of training courses, the Board could have adopted this position.

That is, you could start a

on the subsidy of the courses and immediately seize the payment of 25% of the courses.

He didn't do it that way.

alleged embezzlement

But, what does a resolution of the Supreme in the contentious-administrative field have to do with the criminal jurisdiction, in which the responsibility or not of the former high officials of the Board is being settled?

Well, a lot, in the opinion of the Prosecutor's Office.

In the criminal case that is being followed in the Investigating Court 6 of Seville, the investigators of the Central Operative Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard started from the premise that the former high officials prevaricated and allegedly committed embezzlement by signing the

, without checking them first.

But if the Supreme Court is saying, in the contentious-administrative sphere, that the Board is obliged to pay the subsidies even without being 100% verified, how can it be criminal for a senior official to sign a certification and pay aid in which are there irregularities?

The Prosecutor's Office understands that

.

Sources from the Public Ministry explained that the "intermediate" administrative acts issued by the Board to pay a subsidy could not constitute a crime.

"For there to be prevarication, it must be a

, not a formal one," they clarify.

In addition, the verification and control over the help that the Board must exercise is not only done on the final 25%, but can be deployed in other ways, such as sending

to the courses.

For the Prosecutor's Office, that final certification "does not by itself constitute prevarication", contrary to the criteria of the UCO.

In any case, it will be the investigating judge José Ignacio Vilaplana who will decide, finally, whether or not these certifications have criminal significance and whether there are other elements to maintain the accusation against

of the Board who are being investigated in the main cause of the formation.

This case was filed by Judge María Núñez Bolaños, but the Court reopened it.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more

• Justice

• Corruption

• PSOE

InvercariaThe prosecutor attacks the injection of 1.5 million from the Board in a project of PSOE businessmen: "The story of a nonsense"

Courts The keys to the corruption case that splashes the husband of the director of the Civil Guard

Courts The Court admits the "pernicious effects" of the macro-causes, but continues with the third trial of the ERE

See links of interest

• Last News

• Work calendar 2022

• Sporting Gijon - FC Cartagena

• Spain - Albania, live

• Real Oviedo - Fuenlabrada

• Real Madrid-Urbas Fuenlabrada

• Mirandes - Ponferradina