The judge asks the Valencian Superior Court to charge Mónica Oltra to investigate whether she hid the abuse of her ex-partner from a minor

The Court of Instruction number 15 of Valencia has presented this Friday a reasoned statement to the High Court of Justice of the Valencian Community in which it requests that it charge the Vice President of the Valencian Government and leader of Compromís, Mónica Oltra, and assume the investigation to reveal if the abuses of the ex-husband of politics were hidden from a minor under guardianship.

He was sentenced to five years in prison when he was an educator at a religious reception center, private in nature but with places arranged with the Generalitat, for a continued crime of sexual abuse with prevalence of a minor under 16.

"It must be heard as investigated in this case so that the court adopts the resolution it deems appropriate," says the judge in an order sent to the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community due to the capacity enjoyed by the also deputy Oltra.

The judge's investigation focuses on whether the institutional action protocols were applied in cases of suspected sexual abuse of minors or the duty of custody and the duty to report the crimes perpetrated against the minors under his care were breached.

The judge also suspects that the staff of the ministry, of which Oltra is the head, carried out an investigation parallel to the judicial one and that the minor "far from being protected, was the object of unjustified persecution."

The Vice President of the Valencian Government assured that she will not resign even if the Superior Court accepts the case and charges her.

“I am not going to resign because of this or at the request of the Valencian PP, which is furious because we worked hard so that the disaster they left behind and with which they enriched themselves could be seen,” she maintained.

“The last time that the TSJ charged me was due to a lawsuit filed by a man from the PP who ended up in jail for stealing cooperation funds,” she recalled in reference to counselor Rafael Blasco, convicted of prevarication and embezzlement.

"Decency is not marked by the courts and no illegality has been committed," said Oltra, before participating in an act in Madrid.

In addition, he made reference to the statements of the charges of the counseling that have already appeared before the judge: “Everyone has made it clear that there have been no orders or instructions other than to let them work in freedom.

There are no indications of what does not exist”.

In addition, Oltra has received, once again, the support of the president of the Generalitat, Ximo Puig, who has framed the possible imputation of the vice president in "judicial normality" and has affirmed that he is "not at all" concerned about the stability of the Valencian government.

The president has stressed that "many times issues have come to the TSJCV that have not gone any further."

In an order notified this Friday, against which there is an appeal, the magistrate points out that there are "rational and solid indications" of the participation of the judge in the events for which proceedings are already being carried out against 13 investigated, among senior officials of the Ministry and workers at the center where the events occurred.

The instructor considers that it is no longer possible to "progress in the ordered investigation" without the vice president of the Consell declaring.

The accusation comes from a complaint by the victim, who is now of legal age, and who is represented by the leader of the ultra España 2000 party. The court decided, in October 2021, to file this case since the sentence from which it derives , that of the abuses of the educator, is pending appeal in the Supreme Court.

The judge understood that the sentence was not final and, therefore, the account of the facts was also provisional and "the perpetration of the crime" was not proven.

However, two months later, the Provincial Court forced the judge to reopen the case in which the workers are accused of omission in the duty to prosecute a crime, a crime of abandonment of a minor, prevarication, omission of assistance and cover-up.

The court was based on the fact that, although the appeal before the Supreme Court is still pending,