The judge of the National Court investigating the PDVSA case has refused to summon the president of Venezuela and former president of the PDVSA Board of Directors, Nicolás Maduro, to testify. Judge María Tardón investigates money laundering in Spain of illicit benefits derived from corrupt activities by Venezuelan officials and businessmen related to the public oil company.
The head of the Central Court of Instruction number Three thus dismisses the request of the former Vice Minister of Electrical Development of Venezuela Javier Alvarado Ochoa to be summoned to testify as witnesses or as investigated both Maduro and César Rincón, former director of the company.
The magistrate considers that the “vague, imprecise and unjustified” reference to the fact that both statements are made “as witnesses or investigated” and “evidence that no relevant information can be obtained from them for the proper clarification of the criminal activity in this proceeding.” . She also points out that they are “neither useful nor necessary” to advance the cause.
Tardón explains that the PDVSA case has been divided into four pieces due to the “long and extensive investigation” of the case, which has become “truly unmanageable”, and that it focuses on the possible concealment and laundering of illicit benefits through the purchase of real estate or the creation of holding companies in Spain.
The resolution rejects the other request by Alvarado Ochoa to request new documentation from PDVSA. The judge considers that it refers to facts that, “clearly”, are not the object of the investigation. In addition, according to the information provided to the Hearing for the Venezuelan Justice, those activities to which the documentation points are already being the subject of different procedures followed in that country against some of those investigated, including Ochoa.
In another order, the magistrate agrees to the provisional file and file of the case in what refers to the until now investigated María Lila Bravo de Rincón. The magistrate considers that the indictments do not specify, directly or indicatively, any specific personal action against her, beyond the accusation that is made to “the benefits of the Rincón family” or, where appropriate, for being a wife or mother of two those investigated and their companies, in which no ownership or participation has been shown.
According to the criteria of The Trust Project
