File the complaint by the conspiracies of the former minister of Interior Spanish – Sputnik World

The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed on the inadmissibility filed, and the file of the complaint on the “do not exist evidence that they had committed crimes of violation of secrecy, prevarication and embezzlement of public funds”.

The facts referred to in the complaint make reference to some recordings made in the office of Jorge Fernández Díaz in 2014, when he was still a member of the Government, Mariano Rajoy.

In these conversations, which were brought to light in the past month of June by the Public journal, Fernández Díaz tries Daniel Alfonso gives you data with which to make media scandals against political rivals in connivance with certain journalists

These conspiracies were aimed mainly against pro-independence leaders of the Republican Left of Catalonia (ERC) and convergence and union Democratic of Catalonia (CDC).

In the wake of these revelations, the former mayor of Barcelona and member of CDC, Xavier Trias, decided together to file a lawsuit against Fernández Díaz, and Daniel Alfonso.

the Republican Left of Catalonia also came to the justice, that he saw no reason to investigate the now-former minister.

The complaint filed by Trias, and the CDC believes that the former owner of the Interior and the former director of anti-Fraud incurred an offence of conspiracy to “arrange for the leak to the press” a “confidential information known by reason of their positions”.

Specifically, the complaint refers to information published by the newspaper el Mundo, which said that Trias was hiding money to the Spanish tax department through accounts in Switzerland.

According to the Supreme Court, “the facts in the complaint do not show that it has disclosed information of which the defendant had by reason of his office”.

in Addition, the Court recalls that “the doctrine of the Room is the opposite to admit as the basis of the complaint of facts whose evidence base appears only in the media, as in this case.”

On the recordings that you can hear the former minister conspiring from his office, the court subtracts credibility to your content when it considered that “given the surreptitious of obtaining them” it is impossible to determine if they have been edited, manipulated or altered”.