The judge of the Audiencia Nacional Eloy Velasco, which investigates the Punic plot, considers that the PP of Madrid had ‘B’ accounting of electoral expenses in three electoral campaigns, two of them municipal and autonomic (2007 and 2011) and another one of them of General Elections (2008) and the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office figure 4,916,000 Euros for the irregular financing of the Madrid PP.
The judge maintains that the Civil Guard has been able to prove that “important electoral expenses” of the 2007 and 2008 campaigns and “indirectly” of the 2011 campaigns were paid through “public subsidies” from the Community of Madrid through the Fundescam Foundation.
Velasco, in the documentation that works in the summary, points as responsible to the former Minister of the Presidency and former Secretary General of the PP of Madrid Francisco Granados; the former treasurer of the Beltrán Gutiérrez party and the ex-Minister of Transports Ignacio Echevarría, all of them Fundescam patrons .
4.9 million euros of irregular financing
This money was not included in the electoral accounting, so Anticorruption indicates a possible electoral crime The Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office figures in 4,916,000 euros irregular financing of the PP of Madrid in 2007, 2008 and 2011 through the Punic network, a figure that obtains adding the money that spent more in the electoral campaigns of those years and that did not include in its electoral accounting.
In a report dated March 8, the Office of the Prosecutor highlights that the PP was launched “a decision group”, led by the former Madrid-based Francisco Granados and the ex-manager of the regional party Beltrán Gutiérrez, which used several “irregular financing channels” “to pay the excess expenses of those three electoral campaigns.
Calculate that excess from the study of the B accounts that Gutierrez was found and divide it by years, so that in 2007 they were 2,685,000 euros, in 2008 685,000 and in 2011 1,546,000 euros; in the latter case “without counting the party’s operating account , which was not an electoral account”.
“The Popular Party presented an electoral accounting of resources and expenditures in which it did not include these amounts, ” Anticorrupción notes immediately after said report.
The document analyzes the two seized effects that have been key to finding evidence of irregular financing of the Madrid PP: a notebook or “black notebook” found at the home of Granados and a pendrive found to Gutierrez.
In the book there are handwritten annotations about electoral campaign events from September 2010 to April 2011, and on a sheet there are two columns “IN-OUT”, where, says the Prosecutor’s Office, “allegedly related income of certain entrepreneurs” and they are linked to outings to people like Granados and Gutiérrez.
The “second important finding for the investigation” was the intervention of two pencils of memory of Gutiérrez in the register at home in February 2016, whose analysis “reveals the existence of an accounting B of electoral expenses of the electoral campaigns of the years 2007 , 2008 and 2011 (municipal, autonomous and national) “.
Of these tests, say the prosecutors of the case, it is extracted that a financing channel was through businessmen who did electoral works for the PP and who “agreed to bill whoever was indicated to them by the Party Management”.
The amounts were broken down so that one part was declared to the Court of Audit and another, on the other hand, was opaque. In these invoices, the amounts were broken down so that one part was declared to the Court of Auditors and another, on the other hand , “was opaque . “
Thus, in 2007, 2008 and 2011 the PP of Madrid could have violated the electoral regulations and exceeded in each campaign the spending limits, “deriving its payment to opaque channels of illegal financing”.
“The electoral account of the Party did not collect either the income of all the funds destined to defray the electoral expenses, nor the payments of the same”, says the Office of the Prosecutor.
Another “very active instrument” to finance the party was the Fundescam foundation, through which public subsidies were diverted from the Community of Madrid to the financing of the PP providers. “These payments to suppliers were grossly deviated from the purposes” of the foundation, added the fiscal ones.
Donations were also made to this foundation by people later benefiting from public contracts, as was the case of businessman Arturo Fernández, and a third way has also been detected by which companies received direct awards from the City of Pozuelo de Alarcón in exchange for organizing events for the PP.
The Office of the Prosecutor believes that this diversion of funds for the party was made through a “structure of decision cohesive in time” and formed by directors of election campaign committees, president, secretary general and vice president of the Government of Madrid, as well as the Manager and other positions of the PP and members of the contracting tables of the Community.
The “most active” participants in that network, Gutiérrez and Granados point out, were “for their coinciding responsibilities in the party , in the regional government, in the campaign committees and in the Fundescam foundation.”
This group of people, he adds, is the one who launched a plan of various ways of irregular financing of the PP to pay the “excesses” of spending on campaigns.
The report describes the events as crimes of embezzlement , bribery, falsehood, electoral crime, prevarication and money laundering and poses a series of entries and records to employers.
1.7 million diverted by the PP of Madrid
On the other hand, the Central Operative Union (UCO) of the Civil Guard believes that the popular group in the Madrid Assembly irregularly diverted 1.7 million euros from its budget to the PP in Madrid to defray the costs of the election campaign of the autonomic elections of the year 2007.
The armed institute found among the documentation related to the financing of the expenses of the aforementioned campaign a note of 1.7 million euros indicated as income to the Madrilenian PP that the “PP Assembly Group” would have sent to it , which, according to the UCO, refers to “the Popular Party group of the Assembly of Madrid”.
This is reflected by the UCO in a report dated September 22, 2016, which is included in the summary of the Púnica case, and in which it requested the investigating judge of the case, Eloy Velasco, to request the bank where the popular group had its account. all the information related to the movements , as the magistrate did.
The UCO argues that in the current operating account of the PP of Madrid -which can not be used to bill campaign expenses- were found two incomes of 850,000 euros each “arising from the current account of the Popular Parliamentary Group of the Madrid Assembly” , which could correspond to the 1.7 million mentioned above.
On the other hand, the Civil Guard notes that the Madrid PP “could have billed acts of the election campaign through a company interposed -Sintra Consultores-” using the aforementioned account and not the one that should be used to collect expenses and income made in the campaigns.
Specifically, it details a payment of 517,168 euros of the match to this company in advisory concepts, an amount very similar to that reflected by Sintra in concepts of operations with third parties in a tax return.
“This operation could also respond to the purpose of masking electoral expenses that, in that way, would not be audited, taking into account that the only current accounts audited for electoral purposes are the accounts opened for the electoral campaign,” reflects the UCO.
The Civil Guard explains in this same report how in a memory pen found in the registry the ex-manager of the Beltrán Gutiérrez training, a document with the name “Special Contributions” was found with payments in 2007 from different people and companies to the foundation of Comunidad de Madrid Fundescam for a total amount of 376,000 euros, which was allegedly used to pay electoral expenses for the PP in Madrid.
And it emphasizes, above all “by its amount”, the payments to Fundescam linked to the ex-president of the Madrid employers’ association Arturo Fernández (100,000 euros through the Confederation of Businessmen of Madrid and another 60,000 through its business group, Cantoblanco) and another of 60,000 euros related to Gecesa-Management of Educational Centers.