Thursday, March 28

The firefighter who warned of the irregularities criticizes the Mossos investigation before the judge

A broad and extensive statement. Contrary to many of those investigated who parade through the courts, the sub-inspector of the MDV Fire Department and his boss, the inspector AR, have explained for more than four hours to the judge their version of the case of irregularities in the maintenance of vehicles outsourced to the Sevillian multinational Iturri. His allegations, according to legal sources, have included criticism of key aspects of the investigation of the case carried out by the Mossos d’Esquadra.

Both firefighters share their work in extinguishing fires, rescuing people and administrative tasks (not economic) on the vehicles to be repaired. This Friday they have left the fire station to appear as defendants for embezzlement, fraud against the administration, prevarication and false documents before the judge who is investigating the irregularities in the billing of the repairs to the vehicles of the Generalitat Fire Department.

The MDV sub-inspector, as revealed by his AR boss in one of the phone taps in the case, was the one who “raised the hare” because he was not willing to authorize a repair “knowing that the contract money had run out.” It was also MDV who sent an email to his superiors, which was the origin of the case, warning that the budget had been exhausted and that if the situation was not resolved, repairs could not be carried out on the Firefighters’ vehicles.

The irregularities focus on the fact that the annual contracts between the Generalitat and Iturri were for a lower amount than what the repairs and maintenance of the vehicles actually cost. The “budget exhaustion”, details the judge, was not corrected, but Iturri continued to provide the service. In later years, and within the framework of another contract, Iturri invoiced the services it had provided but had not received the previous year, which required “altering invoices and delivery notes”. What the judge does not see is that there were bribes in this mechanism.

According to legal sources, both investigated have denied that they had a share in the economic part of the contract with Iturri (they were only in charge of saying which vehicles had to be repaired) and have explained to the judge what, in their opinion, are errors of the Mossos d’Esquadra, the judicial police in the case.

Thus, where the Catalan police saw that the same vehicle was repaired three times in the same month, those investigated have clarified that the Mossos only looked at the service invoice, but not at the delivery note, which was where it was detailed that in In reality, these three repairs corresponded to different months.

They have also replied that the Mossos point out as an irregularity the change of the internal code of several fire trucks, which according to those investigated is explained because in police cars it does not change and coincides with the license plate, unlike in firefighting cars. On fire trucks, they have alleged, the code automatically changes each time a vehicle moves from one park to another, and does not match the license plate.

Both investigated have also maintained that the fact that Iturri repaired vehicles whose maintenance actually depended on a ‘renting’ company cannot be attributed to them, as the Mossos defend, but to the delay of the Heritage technicians in updating the vehicle ownership.

“Annoyance” with the Ministry

Moreover, both investigated have shown their “anger” with the former heads of the Ministry of the Interior, led by Miquel Sàmper, for the management they made of the reserved information opened precisely from the aforementioned MDV email of April 2021.

According to sources present in the statement, the two firefighters have reproached the previous Interior team for not calling them to give their version of the case and only requiring documentation, contrary to what is established in the reserved information protocol. And they have attributed this rush to the fact that the new ERC minister, Joan Ignasi Elena, was about to enter the ministry and that Sàmper wanted to quickly close the reserved information.

About the 2% pointed out in an internal document that raised the suspicions of an Interior lawyer, who later before the judge could not explain if it was a commission, both investigated have pulled irony. According to his version, that annotation is explained by a misunderstanding between former CEO Manel Pardo and the lawyer when the former told him about Iturri’s problems with billing. In his statement as a defendant, Pardo alleged that the 2% were not commissions but management expenses. The two firefighters have been more to the point: “It is someone who does not dominate a subject explaining it to someone who dominates it less”. The next investigated in the case will appear on May 16.



www.eldiario.es