The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office has supported the indictment of Jéssica Rodríguez, ex-partner of the former Minister of Transport José Luis Ábalos, in the 'Koldo case' being instructed in the National Court (AN). The Public Ministry argues that her testimony as a witness in the trial of the 'mask case' before the Supreme Court (TS), where she admitted to having received salaries from two public companies without performing functions, "is reliable" and "is corroborated" by "numerous pieces of evidence."
In a document accessed by Europa Press, Anti-Corruption opposes the appeals from the defenses of Rodríguez and Ignacio Zaldívar, former senior official of the Administrator of Railway Infrastructures (Adif), against the decision to investigate them for the alleged irregular hiring of Rodríguez in the public companies Ineco and Tragsatec between 2019 and 2021, a period in which Ábalos held the Transport portfolio.
Both Zaldívar and Rodríguez were summoned to testify as investigated parties last July, but they invoked their right not to respond. On that same day, Joseba García, brother of Koldo García, former ministerial advisor convicted in the 'mask case', also appeared as an investigated party, who denied having intervened in the employment incorporation of Ábalos' ex-partner at Adif.
Regarding Rodríguez, Anti-Corruption refers to a previous report in which it already expressed support for calling her as an investigated party. The defense of the ex-partner of the former minister argued, among other points, that the facts would have already been judged in the Supreme Court's 'mask case' procedure, in which Ábalos, Koldo García, and businessman Víctor de Aldama were sentenced to 24, 19, and four and a half years in prison, respectively.
More than 40,000 euros without attending the position
During her testimony as a witness in the TS, Jéssica Rodríguez acknowledged that she never physically joined her position at Ineco and stated that Ábalos was aware of this circumstance. "I only had to do what Joseba and Koldo asked me. I was paid and was waiting for what they told me I had to do," she related. The Supreme Court's ruling established that she received more than 40,000 euros from both public entities.
From that resolution, Anticorruption concludes that "the statement of proven facts of the Supreme Court ruling regarding Jéssica Rodríguez's participation in her hiring by Ineco and Tragsatec must necessarily imply a modification of her procedural situation, acquiring the status of investigated."
The Prosecutor's Office emphasizes that Rodríguez "was emphatic in stating that José Luis Ábalos was aware of this reality" and that it was to him "that she conveyed her complaints about the requests for information she was receiving."
The Public Ministry also highlights that Ábalos's ex-partner "also confirmed the monthly perception of the agreed salaries and that during the period she was hired by both companies, she made various trips, up to thirteen, with José Luis Ábalos." These movements, in the opinion of Anticorruption, fit with the rest of the evidence gathered in the case.
Reliability of the testimony and role of Zaldívar
For the Prosecutor's Office, the version provided by Rodríguez "is reliable," although it acknowledges that "it could be objected" that, given her "not dismissible and potential criminal responsibility" is on the table, it is necessary to apply a "much more cautious" assessment criterion.
"But, even so, the reliability judgment is not affected. Jéssica Rodríguez's testimony is decisively corroborated in its core aspects by numerous pieces of evidence. That is to say, attention is being drawn to the eventual responsibility of Jéssica Rodríguez, a consideration that cannot be overlooked before this court," adds the Anticorruption document.
Regarding Ignacio Zaldívar, who also testified in the Supreme Court about the alleged irregular hiring of Rodríguez, the Prosecutor's Office dismisses that his right to defense or the right not to testify against himself has been violated. It specifies that "it is not his statements that motivate his indictment, but those given by another witness," referring to Virginia Barbancho, head of Tragsatec at the time of the events.
As Anticorruption recalls, Barbancho, in a testimony to which it grants "full reliability," explained before the high court that she received a call from Zaldívar "intimidating her" to "leave Jéssica Rodríguez alone, specifying that the minister had spoken with the president of Adif (at that time Isabel Pardo de Vera, also indicted in this case) to express his displeasure with the situation generated."
"Ignacio Zaldívar acknowledged in the court hearing the content of said conversation and how, in effect, he had been requested by the president of Adif, who specified to him that she had received instructions from the minister, to inform the heads of Tragsatec not to bother Jessica Rodríguez," continues the Public Prosecutor's Office.
Regarding the hiring at Tragsatec, the Prosecutor's Office, relying on the proven facts of the Supreme Court ruling, indicates that Pardo de Vera commissioned Zaldívar certain "actions to seek the hiring of Rodríguez" without it being essential to conduct a "prior interview," which reinforces, in its opinion, the suspicions of irregularity.