Statement from the Judiciary on the innocence of the president of UD Las Palmas


Full statement from the General Council of the Judiciary regarding the president of UD Las Palmas, Miguel Ángel Ramírez.

The Court of Las Palmas acquits Miguel Ángel Ramírez of fraud against the Treasury and Social Security

The case was resolved for the first time with a private vote in favor of convicting the founder of Seguridad Integral Canaria

“The First Section of the Provincial Court of Las Palmas acquitted the businessman Miguel Ángel Ramírez Alonso of all the crimes against the Public Treasury and Social Security that the Public Prosecutor’s Office accused him of and the private accusations in the process that led to him at the dock.

Today the House announced the sentence, which runs to more than 74 pages and expresses the opinion of the majority of the House. The resolution included a dissenting vote by a member of the court in favor of sentencing the two defendants for tax crimes and crimes against Social Security.

The Prosecutor’s Office requested 21 years in prison for Miguel Ángel Ramírez Alonso and five for the other accused. It was considered proven that the head of the SIC defrauded the Social Security of 30.06 million euros between 2009 and 2017 and avoided paying 6.60 million to the Treasury between 2009 and 2013.

The acquittal decision, which enters into an analysis of previous questions raised by the defense, concludes that criminal action cannot be considered to be brought for crimes covering the fiscal years from 2010 to 2013 and for social security contributions from 2009 to 2012, for not having taken the obligatory and necessary statement about these events from those under investigation during the investigation. Without such a declaration, said the Chamber, the delimitation of the punishable basis is not possible, nor the subsequent accusation and, even less, their conviction, since they will be exposed to a clear and decisive situation of defenselessness.

This decision of the Court is the result of the declaration of annulment of the investigation of the case at the time he was in charge of the Court (Instruction No. 8 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria) and is in charge of this case now. former magistrate Salvador Alba, whose procedural action is void in its entirety.

The Court, to make such a decision, relied on the proven facts of the sentence that sentenced Alba to six years in prison for prevarication, bribery and falsification of documents, passed by the Criminal Chamber of the TSJC on September 10, 2019 and confirmed by the Supreme Court.

The Chamber held that “on the same day” that Alba assumed Instruction Eight, he issued a resolution agreeing to the taking of statements from businessman Miguel Ángel Ramírez and one of his former associates as defendants, when did not specify anything, and included a “false and twisted” purpose, irrelevant to the investigation. For this reason, the Court considers that resolution and the statements made before the former magistrate to be contrary to law.

On the other hand, the Court understands that, with regard to the fiscal year of 2009, there is no criminal violation, since the tax base to be taken as reference is not limited.

“The total amount that SIC failed to pay to the Tax Agency in fiscal year 2009 in relation to the unpaid withholdings of the amounts it was obligated to withhold due to the personal income tax of its workers for payment has not yet been proven. of such unusual hours or other concepts included in subkey L 01 of model 190 as per diem exceeding 120,000 euros,” the decision said.


The Court admitted that there is a financial irregularity in treating as per diem what amounts to overtime pay and other productivity bonuses, but said that not everything declared as per diem should be translated by the aforementioned concepts.

He believes that it is also logical to think that there are workers who, in order to carry out their surveillance and security, are forced to move from the place where the various operational centers of the company are located to others, and therefore can generate bonuses. .

On the other hand, the resolution considers that the average limited as withholding – 19.70%, according to the accusations – does not correspond to the real average arising from the types of withholding resulting from making corrections derived from calculating each of the workers. . Therefore, it was declared that “it is not possible to determine if the debt exceeds 120,000 euros.”

Social Security Agreement

With reference to the indictment for crimes against Social Security, period 2009 to 2012, it was outside the scope of what could be punished, in the Chamber’s opinion, because there was an agreement between Social Security and the company in which the recognition of the debt , from which comes a liquidation and a promise to pay the contributions due to Social Security. This action is related to another Social Security precedent regarding contributions accumulated in the period between 2005 and 2008.

There is another accusation that refers to Social Security obligations covering the period from the end of 2013 to 2017, related to the approval of agreements where working conditions are set below what is established in the agreement of the state. These two agreements are declared null and void by social jurisdiction. Therefore, the payments of Social Security contributions must be regular and the amount due and payable must be paid, with a commitment to this purpose on the part of the company, which has paid contributions corresponding to the contributions of workers and related others. .

Although the Chamber does not question the existence of the difference and the duty to regularize it, the ruling state, it does not consider it proven that such a result is the result of fraudulent action, as required by the applicable criminal offense.

On the other hand, the sentence indicates that no accusation has been made for a crime against workers’ rights.

Finally, it was considered that since the legal administrator of the SIC was replaced and the second defendant began to exercise that role, although it was obvious that Miguel Ángel Ramírez was the majority partner, it was not possible to prove for the purposes of punishment that he also performed as de facto administrator.

“It is our opinion that in the case prosecuted,” said the decision, “from the evidence presented it does not appear with the necessary clarity and sufficiency that the status of de facto administrator of SIC is necessary to maintain the status of de facto administrator of The SIC can effectively attribute to the accused Miguel Ángel R. the accusation against him, the moment he ceased his position as legal administrator on 8/2/2011.” The verdict is subject to appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Source: La Verdad


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Share post:



More like this