The Supreme Court has ratified the sentences dictated by the National Hearing in Research on the Contracts in Aena and the Gürtel frame between 2000 and 2002. The High Court only slightly lowers the penalty to two of the four condemned when applying the dilatory attenuating
undue
Therefore, the convictions of prison for the former communication director of Aena Ángel López de la Mota and his subordinate José María Gavarri, whom Francisco Correa had known when worked at the PP press office
.
The convictions for passive bribery, prevarication, and fraud to public administrations also suppose 14 years of disqualification and fines of 95,000 and 168,000 euros, respectively.
The Supreme does not lower the prison or the fines despite the delays in the cause because in their case the penalties were already imposed on their minimum threshold.
As for the leader of the corrupt plot, the conviction goes from six years and nine months to six years and three months.
In the case of it, by continued crime of active bribery, fraud to public administrations, prevarication and falsehood in mercantile document.
Likewise, the benefit obtained as a consequence of contracts irregularly awarded by Aena to its companies, which amounted to 2.2 million euros.
The low fine of 654,000 euros at 265,000 euros, again by the delays.
A José Luis Lezdo López, former accountant of the group of Correa companies is kept at three years and three months in prison, although the fine (654,000 euros at 131,750) is discussed by active bribery and falsehood in commercial document.
The sentence, of which the Magistrate Paul Llarena has been rapporteur, emphasizes that the national audience has declared proven that the two charges of Aena agreed with Correa “the irregular award of a total of 22 contracts of the Aena public entity to carry out events or
Participate in fairs, all in exchange for receiving cash or certain services of a particular nature. ”
He adds that, although the scope of the prejudice suffered by Aena has not been quantified, “the truth is that the proven facts proclaim that the majority of the contracts were awarded with market surprese and very considerable percentages of benefit for companies awarded,
Passing invoices in which the services carried out or disaggregated the services carried out, the units of work executed or the unit prices for each billed concept. And all this in exchange for illicit commissions that have been affected at the price with surchases “.
The magistrates ratify the reasoning of the audience to condemn contracts “with disproportionate profit margins” that allowed “a remarkable enrichment” of the belt companies and who were accompanied by economic rewards for the two defendants of Aena.
