Alfredo De Miguel’s defense calls for his imprisonment to be prevented

The defense of Alfredo de Miguel, the former leader of the PNV who led the biggest corruption plot uncovered in Euskal Herriahas filed an appeal against the May 25 car of the Provincial Court of Alava who ordered his entry into prison, judicial sources report.

In this decision, the court rejected the allegations of De Miguel’s lawyer, Stephanie Redand ordered that his sentence be carried out, but before this decision there was room for a final appeal, which has been filed by the defense.

Now this resource is transferred to the persecution to pronounce it. Once the prosecution has issued its verdict, the court must reconfirm the admission to prison, which may take even longer as the convicted person has several days to appear in prison.

De Miguel, also a former provincial deputy, was sentenced to 12 years and 4 months (although with a maximum effective prison term of 9 years) for leading a network to irregularly obtain government contracts from administrations under the PNV and collect commissions.

The main responsible for the plot – in total they were 14 people convicted– had asked the Court to apply the Article 80 of the Criminal Codeincluding cases where custodial sentences may be suspended.

However, the court of Álava saw in its decision of May 25 “impossible” may apply that article for various reasons. The first, that the sentence for one of the crimes for which he was convicted (unauthorized association) “in itself” exceeds two years in prison.

With regard to De Miguel’s request for a partial pardon for that sentence – a matter to be dealt with in a separate piece – the court believes it is “highly doubtful” that it will be granted “in line with the rest of the crimes for which he has been charged.” convicted”. condemned” and by the “great social alarm” generated by this case.

In addition, De Miguel “abused” his public office to commit crimes, his actions caused “a major social unrest and it is fair to serve prison sentences”.

The Court also failed to consider in its latest order that there is “nothing special” in his personal circumstances that justifies the suspension of the sentence, even if he has minor children.

This decision of 25 May is the decision against which an appeal has now been lodged. It so happens that, in the case of his wife, Ainhoa ​​Bilbaoalso convicted, the Court admitted that she did not go to prison because she assumed she is the mother of two minors and that her husband was convicted in the same case.