Judge José Ignacio Vilaplana has issued an order to archive a separate piece of the case regarding the employment regulation files (ERE) concerning six investigated individuals, including three former senior officials of the Junta de Andalucía, for the aid granted to the company Grupo TPM, Inversiones Plásticas TPM, S.L. However, the investigation related to other aid received by Grupo TPM linked to the guarantees is still ongoing.
The judge, head of the Court of Instruction No. 6 of the Court of First Instance of Seville, was analyzing the possible irregularity of the subsidies and public funding granted by the Employment Department of the Junta, through the IFA/IDEA agency, to Grupo TPM, which received from the Andalusian Administration, "at least," aid of 1.5 million euros and a loan for the same amount.
According to the Communication Office of the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia (TSJA), in an order dated October 13, the instructor agrees to archive the case against a former Deputy Minister of Employment of the Junta, a former General Director of Labor and Social Security, and a former Director of Strategic Investments of the IDEA agency.
The case also included three company officials, investigated for the alleged commission of crimes of administrative prevarication, misappropriation of public funds, and documentary falsification.
Specifically, the judge decrees the free dismissal regarding the former Deputy Minister of Employment and the former General Director of Labor, considering that both "would have already been prosecuted" and convicted for these same facts in the abbreviated procedure "related to the criminal illegality of the so-called specific procedure established to carry out the illegal granting of aid by the responsible parties of the Junta," following the criterion "established for this purpose" by the Seventh Section of the Provincial Court of Seville.
The order reasons that the subsidy or public aid examined in this piece "was agreed and paid within the period of prosecution in the case of the specific procedure" by the then General Director of IFA/IDEA, in coordination with the General Directorate of Labor.
These disbursements "would have been made by commission to the IDEA agency, through a financing transfer charged to item 31-L," so that, "insofar as such aids were granted and paid within the framework of the specific procedure, it is not possible to agree to continue the present case" against these two former senior officials of the Junta.
The magistrate thus applies the doctrine established by the Seventh Section of the Provincial Court of Seville, "by virtue of which the accused in the case of the specific procedure cannot also be investigated or accused in the other cases or separate pieces in which the fraudulent mechanism subject to prosecution in this last procedure has been used," since this could imply "a double prosecution for the same facts and break the principle 'non bis in idem' as an essential element of the fundamental right to a fair trial with all guarantees."
The instructor also declares the criminal responsibility of the former general director of Grupo TPM extinguished, given his death in September 2017.
Furthermore, he agrees to the provisional dismissal of the proceedings regarding two other representatives of the company and the former director of Strategic Investments of the IDEA agency, understanding, in their case, that "there are no solid indications of criminality" in relation to either of them.
Regarding the two representatives of the company, the judge states that, "even though they may have had some tangential participation in obtaining and managing this aid, the truth is that it is not recorded that they had any decision-making capacity in this regard, as it was fundamentally resided" in two executives of Grupo TPM who have already passed away.
As for the former director of Strategic Investments of IDEA, the magistrate specifies that, after the instruction was carried out, "it has not been possible to verify any intervention or action on his part of sufficient relevance to influence and control the criminal process recognized in the records, beyond receiving some email related to the aid subject to this procedure; thus, there are no other evidences of greater solidity that could support the decision to agree to continue the case against him."