Griñán files an incident of annulment before the Supreme Court to try to avoid jail

The former Andalusian president José Antonio Griñán has presented this Tuesday before the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court an incident of annulment against the sentence that sentenced him to six years in prison for embezzlement and prevarication in the case of the ERE.

After the request for a partial pardon submitted to the Government by his family at the beginning of September and this appeal for annulment, Griñán's defense plans to present an amparo appeal before the Constitutional Court for alleged violation of a fundamental right during the judicial investigation, by which the magistrates could exceptionally suspend the sentence.

The three initiatives have the same objective: to avoid the imprisonment of someone who was also president of the PSOE.

The annulment incident, which has little chance of prospering according to legal sources, wields a possible injury to the principle of presumption of innocence, as the Supreme Court's ruling was "fractionated" in a first announcement on July 26 (when the sentence) and the subsequent notification of the complete ruling on September 14 (with the arguments and the 1,205 pages of the ruling).

For Griñán's defense, "for 50 days there was a public proclamation of guilt without sentence."

In addition, the annulment incident indicates the alleged lack of response to two of the reasons included in the appeal filed by Griñán against the initial sentence of the Court of Seville, warns of undue delays in the resolution process of the appeal and, above all, it wields the particular vote formulated by two of the five members of the court of the Supreme Court's sentence.

Regarding the lack of an answer for two reasons, the Court mentioned Griñán's “passivity” when the General Intervention of the Board demanded improvements and he alleged that he always raised the requests for financial control of the Intervention to the Governing Council.

However, the Supreme does not answer that request for clarification on the alleged "passivity" of the former president, which is not even mentioned at that point in the sentence (page 499).

In addition, in the resolution of the questions prior to the trial at the Hearing, social and labor aid was not included as an object of prosecution and then it does appear in the sentence, which for Griñán is a clear violation of the right of defense.

The third reason for the annulment incident is the particular vote, issued by the magistrates Ana Ferrer and Susana Polo, who differentiate, in relation to the crime of embezzlement, between those who were part of the Ministry of Employment, where they discharge the responsibility of the embezzlement, and those who intervened in the budget process but without knowing or participating directly, in his opinion, in the final distribution of funds, such as Griñán.

"None of the five defendants referred to intervened in these fraudulent acts of the final stretch of the execution of the budget, nor were they aware that they were being carried out by authorities and officials of the Ministry of Employment," the judges maintain in their dissenting opinion.

Finally, the defense of the former president highlights a "violation" of the principle of presumption of innocence, analyzing that the Supreme Court's ruling, "rather than reviewing" that of the Court, "fills in the gaps" of it, that is, that " goes beyond” its mission.

“Of the eventual possibility that Griñán knew of the eventual fraud, the Supreme Court attributes a direct fraud to him and says that all the politicians had the same purpose of subtracting public funds.

It is an affirmation that surpasses the Court of Seville and without supporting evidence ”, emphasize sources of the defense of the former president.

The incident also highlights the undue delays of two years (between June 15, 2020 and September 14, 2022) elapsed between the ruling of the Seville Court and that of the Supreme Court.

The incident of annulment thus requests annulment of the Supreme Court ruling or a "moderation" of the sentences imposed, requesting in parallel the suspension of the judicial resolution pending a response to the questions raised before it, received last day 19 by the First Section of the Court of Seville, precisely to begin its execution phase.

In their request for partial pardon, Griñán's family did not allege discrepancies with the sentence but rather "reasons of humanity and fairness", since the former Andalusian president is "a 76-year-old citizen with an impeccable life record" and that, "after more After 40 years in public service from the highest responsibilities, he has never received any remuneration other than his salary as an official”, ruling out any “personal or family enrichment”.