A member of the Traumatology court assured that, when correcting the examinations of his category within the great 2018 OPE of the Basque Health Service (Osakidetza), he felt that he read “photocopies” and not only among themselves, but also with respect to the correction template. Since then, a Vitoria court has investigated whether there were leaks to benefit specific opponents, even more so because in various tests the best marks coincide with hospital colleagues of the author of the questions. The investigator of this case, Cristina Rodríguez Ruiz, has decided to extend the summary until January 2022 to try to determine if there are crimes and perpetrators behind this matter and has issued an order in which the defendants are expanded from eleven to twenty, advanced by this newspaper. But as or more important as your decisions are your red lines. The magistrate will not investigate the then counselor, Jon Darpón or his team, which has motivated the congratulations of the PNV, and has also made it clear that “having the original examinations in court does not contribute anything of interest to the cause.”
The PNV sends a “big hug” to former councilor Darpon after learning that he will not be charged by the Osakidetza OPE
In the procedure there are two unions in person as a popular accusation. They are LAB and ESK. The first had asked to incorporate into the cause “the approved exams” of 26 medical specialties of the OPE, in addition to a map of those approved to see if they coincided with the real authors of the questionnaires. The second demanded the questions and answers of the exams and the bibliography of “all” the categories. Your Honor’s response is blunt. It is not only the “does not contribute anything to the cause” but ensures that they would not be reviewed.
“In relation to the contribution of the originals of the examinations, it is neither necessary nor useful to bring to this procedure a volume of documentation that will not be examined by the court due to the scant interest it has for the case, as well as the unnecessary need to read an endless succession of medical questions whose content and response is totally alien to the jurisdictional function and which is not the subject of this proceeding, since an incorrect assessment of the examinations is not being prosecuted, but a possible leak “, argues Judge Rodríguez Ruiz , which is the third in charge of the investigation on the oppositions after Yolanda Varona and Ana Jesús Zulueta.
It so happens that in these years a request for examinations has already been made. Osakidetza delivered them in boxes and the result is that only half a dozen were photocopied and incorporated into the cause. They were the tests of practical clinical cases in the category of Anesthesia and corresponded, for the most part, to opponents with excellent marks. This newspaper had access to this material and the responses revealed that these alleged beneficiaries of leaks followed patterns. The first was that they had all dropped the same question out of six possible, the second. The second was that they had all answered the rest of the questionnaire in the same order, although it was a free choice. His sequence was this: 1-6-3-4-5. The third was that at a syntactic and style level, the length, wording, order and level of detail of the responses of these candidates was very similar despite being open responses and not multiple choice. And the fourth is that all of them received a very high score despite making the same basic mistake. They err in the “autosomal” concept, which can never be linked to the X chromosome and which constitutes a basic principle of genetics, as several medical sources explained to this newspaper at the time.
All were called to testify just a year ago, in September 2020. They were questioned by Judge Zulueta and argued that the similarities corresponded to the fact that they had studied together. In the case of the error, and without details, they indicated that it could be either a failure in the manual they consulted -which was apparently a foreigner- or another type of mistake in the annotations of one that was later replicated by the others, although the own Wikipedia solves the doubt. The author of the questions was the head of these professionals in Txagorritxu, Dr. César Augusto Valero, who justified his good grade because they were “highly qualified.”
In this time, those “photocopies” that were the Traumatology examinations have not reached the court and apparently they will not arrive either, although ESK and LAB have announced appeals to the last judicial resolution and could affect their claims at this point. However, the instructor has made it clear that neither a good grade nor the coincidence of the workplace between members of the court and opponents is, by itself, a sufficient indication. It wouldn’t even be a promise of leakage. “Being waiting does not mean that he has finally obtained them,” he points out about a recording collected by a complainant about a possible leak of the questions.
The magistrate argues that these months she will carry out new procedures and will listen to new witnesses and defendants, but she maintains that she will not initiate a “prospective” analysis of the entire OPE. And he makes it clear that he will not seek responsibilities beyond the participants in the exams by ruling out the imputation of the Osakidetza leadership or the Basque Institute of Public Administration (IVAP). In search of greater transparency, this announcement had as a novelty that part of the elaboration of the questions was outsourced to this second body. But since he did not have specialist doctors, he ended up asking Osakidetza and she gave him the list of those who finally put the tests.
According to the magistrate, those senior officials did not have the questions and could not filter them. And there the possible responsibility ends: “The persons indicated by the accusation are not part of any association, unless the Basque Government, Osakidetza or IVAP is considered such and it is also intended that these organizations promote the commission of crime or that using the institutional structures they are promoting illicit conduct. Nor is it known, even incidentally, that they have formed a ‘parallel’ association or that they have met for any illicit purpose, or that they have carried out or promoted any illicit conduct. There are no indications in this procedural phase to understand that none of the elements of the type described concur “.
See here the full coverage of the Osakidetza OPE investigation