The former manager of the Valencian PP, convicted of irregular financing in the ‘Gürtel case’, was the party leader who ordered his provincial counterpart in Castellón that the training account paid 72,480 euros to Carlos Fabra’s company for services of safety advice about which nothing has been heard. The investigating judge of the ‘Fabra II case’, magistrate Jacobo Pin, questioned Miguel Carot Blasco, provincial manager and attorney-in-fact for the Castellón PP account, about the payments to the company Asdecas SL, owned by Carlos Fabra, a year after to leave the post of president of the Castellón Provincial Council. The order “came to me from Valencia”, assures the attorney in the video of his statement to which elDiario.es has had access.
The payment was quite peculiar, beyond that there is no trace of the supposed works. Carlos Fabra was, along with Miguel Carot, the other attorney for the Castellón PP account and at the same time the owner of the company that collected the 72,480 euros. The invoices (for “work and advice on security issues for the Popular Party and its members”) had nothing to do with the corporate purpose of the Fabra company.
The order, according to the provincial manager, came from Valencia and was not something usual. “They provided me with the necessary funds to be able to proceed with the payment. They transferred the amounts to me from the accounts of the Valencia party to proceed with the payment of Asdecas,” explains the man, now retired.
“Who gave the order?” Asks the judge. “My partner in Valencia, provincial manager,” Carot responds. “What was his name?” Insists the magistrate. “Cristina Ibáñez”, answers the attorney for the party’s accounts in Castellón in reference to the former manager sentenced to three years and four months in prison by the second section of the Criminal Chamber of the National Court in the framework of the case on the irregular financing of the Valencian PP of the electoral campaigns of 2007 and 2008 organized by the companies of the Gürtel plot (Ibáñez got out of prison by paying the fine to which he was sentenced).
“They brought me a bill [que] I was contemplating an amount that corresponded to what had been transferred to me from Valencia. I received three transfers that are the same as the three payments, “says Miguel Carot.” I don’t quite understand it very well, “the judge tells him.
“Is it a normal, habitual dynamic?” Insists Magistrate Jacobo Pin.
—No, this dynamic is not normal. From Valencia I received little money, it was an extraordinary thing.
“And it didn’t catch your attention?”
“Well, there was no illegality.”
“Do you remember who the attorney in the account was at that time?”
—Man, Carlos Fabra, provincial president.
“Aha … and did you know that the Asdecas merchant belonged to Carlos Fabra?”
—At first, no, but later I saw the signatures and he signed it and I received it.
—And it did not attract his attention that it was a payment for him being authorized in the account [del PP]?
The manager, despite the peculiar order, did not verify that the alleged order in matters of security had been made (nor did he observe any incompatibility in which a bank account of the party in which Fabra was proxy entered his company 72,480 euros). “It is that I was conditioned by the one who sends me the funds to proceed with those payments,” he alleges before the magistrate Jacobo Pin.
The judge is not quite convinced by the provincial manager’s explanation. “The same thing is that I don’t quite understand it, but I notice a bit of contradiction: on the one hand you are telling me that they are instructions that come to you from Valencia and that you limit yourself to fulfilling them but, on the other hand, you have told me that the person to whom he had to make those payments asked him to provide the supporting invoices to make those payments and be able to justify them. Come on, I notice there a bit of contradiction, “the magistrate snapped.
“I have to justify some funds, I pass some audits of the party, the accounts are reviewed every year by the Court of Auditors and things have to be justified in the accounting,” Carot abounds. The examining magistrate insists: “Of course, and so you are telling me that the justification was to require those invoices but you did not consider it justified to see if those jobs that were to be paid for someone else’s account had actually been completed.” “I consider them good when whoever sends me the funds tells me, that those funds go specifically to pay those expenses. Some expenses that I suppose that he, or she [presumiblemente se refiere a la entonces gerente Cristina Ibáñez] He had authorized them “, argues the attorney for the Castellón PP account.” Already … “, the judge responds not too convinced with the answer.
– Did you ask Carlos Fabra in relation to these payments?
-I do not know.
The magistrate continues the interrogation and asks Carot if he saw any documentary traces of the alleged security advisory work of Carlos Fabra’s company. “The work could still be done in Valencia, Castellón or anywhere else,” argues Carot, who ends up admitting that he did not see any documentation.
“Has anyone from the company or on behalf of the company Asdecas gave talks, conferences, gave instructions to the members of the Popular Party on security matters, that you know of?”
“I don’t know.”
The manager is saved from the bench
The mysterious security duties for the party are not entirely clear. Next, the representative of the Public Prosecutor’s Office continues with the interrogation. “Do you remember who you paid, Asdecas or Carlos Fabra?” He asks. “Well, I have looked at the receipts (…) and what appears in the receipt I think is signed by Carlos Fabra and one is signed by a third person,” explains Carot.
“Did you know that he was related to Asdecas?” He was the president of his party … – the representative of the Public Ministry abounds.
—When Carlos Fabra signs, I understand that if he signs it is because he has to sign. It does not sign Carlos Fabra, it does not say “signed Carlos Fabra” but “signed by Asdecas” and the signature of Carlos Fabra.
The questioned, in a condition of being investigated and assisted by his lawyer, has been one of the lucky ones in the ‘Fabra II case’ that has been freed from the bench. The judge declared the possible criminal responsibility of Miguel Carot extinguished by having prescribed the alleged crime against him.