Editorial Review of Jesus Sintora’s New Book

The years have increasingly shown that there are political and economic pressure groups that do not run directly in elections, but increase their power and wealth. There are citizens who have to spend about a thousand euros by the end of the month, while electricity bills are multiplied and there are privatized companies that achieve record profits or write to former politicians who have no experience in this field. But with a good agenda of contacts. When companies such as electricity companies, oil companies or banks are breaking their maximum profits and citizens feel they are abusing their patience, the main challenge for the manager is to protect the general interest. Public authorities must establish order in increasing inequality that does not seem to reach the limit.

Among the major obstacles are the connections that the strongest can make and that can be put on the ropes by governments, critical journalists or those who stand in their way. There are connections ranging from large strategic companies, to politics, to the judiciary or to the media, that show the true establishment. This is power. It is no longer the case that among the powerful they can defend themselves. It is that they believe in the democracy they are. Inviolable Networks. The power that can pick up the phone and determine what it should be like. Calling for the betterment of our democracy, the book “They Do Not Want You to Know This” by Jesus Sintora Investigates and condemns aspects of politics, justice, protection networks, public services, or the media that show pockets of privilege, shadow power, or resistance to change.

The case of King Emeritus is a paradigm of national shame for Spanish democracy in recent years. His adventures related to corruption have long been known, but he did not talk about it, hid it or put it on his toes. The big media did. As well as political and economic power. He looked good at how he rubbed his elbows with the monarch or talked about how popular he was and did not condemn his bad practices. With this complicity some sought to earn an income. Others simply do not encounter problems. In this way complicity did not prevent Juan Carlos I from correcting his attitude and answering for justice. Went unpunished.

Below is an excerpt related to the case of King Emeritus, his inviolability, the archives of the Spanish investigation, and the role of the media:

“I was recently arguing with an old journalist about the inconvenience of reporting the bad behavior of a respected king. He was somewhat in favor of silence. The head of state, the protection of the crown, the coexistence of the Spaniards, the guarantee of the stability of Spain, and I do not know how many more. My answer was clear and simple: it’s the ones who have hurt the monarchy the most, and all you have mentioned are those who have known the king’s bad habits for so many years and looked the other way. The problem is not to say this, the problem has been hidden for so long. This creates an open bar feeling that anything is possible without witnesses.

The case of journalism is also a testimony. He must promote an advanced and fully democratic society that needs to know, to know. The journalist, among other things, must be the one who also exercises control over power in such a simple way as to tell people what is going on. It may seem simple, but you know there are always those who make it something very difficult. By the way, something is wrong when they are silently rewarded and those who tell are punished. If those who hide reality, choose a sugar shell, spin around their toes or look the other way, that too is a message to the messenger. This quote, you will get a reward for it. looks good. It concerns you. ᲨLet’s keep it. You will be fine. Hand on shoulder. This is the way… (…).

In Spain, prosecutors concluded in March 2022 that King Emeritus had hidden more than 85 million euros from the treasury in various tax havens, but could not be prosecuted: for prescriptions and inviolability, for the commendable work of governments, prosecutors. Tax agencies, judges, and tax havens like Switzerland, where the government has been protecting the concealment of funds for decades. It was with this official information that Juan Carlos I hid 85,596,266 euros. He lied to the Spanish treasury of at least 56,097,616 euros. Summary: More than 85 million hidden and more than 56 million fraud in the treasury. Official data shows a series of funds called “gifts” and several names as intermediaries called “friends”. One might think that they are figures and not gifts, but commissions and other derivatives of corruption, but then it would be a bad idea.

Along with Juan Carlos de Borbon in the United Arab Emirates, it was expected that the investigations would be archived as he gradually declared himself in various press leaks. As well as preparing the ground for public opinion. Finally, the announcement of the installation of shelves appeared in the middle of the Ukrainian war. The prosecutor completed three investigations into Emeritus and filed it. It was the result of years of news about the King transferring money to countries like Switzerland, transferring portfolios with taxes, buying expensive real estate with his mistress Corina, or traveling and relationships with billionaire Gulf satraps. (…)

According to the information published by the State Prosecutor General’s Office, the server consults the treasury inspector and finds that:

With regard to the Lucum Foundation and the $ 100 million collection, the Supreme Court Prosecution acknowledges that it assessed the commission of a crime against the public treasury under the concept of personal income tax from 2008 to 2012 and inheritance and gift tax in 2008 and 2010. This means committing up to seven crimes against the state treasury. However, they are considered unlawful, without criminal reprimand, for the purpose of four of them: personal income tax from 2008 to 2011. In the case of the 2012 financial year, no personal income tax will be imposed because. This is a very large sum of money and therefore we would be faced with the possible commission of an aggravating crime. Which means that it would have a longer statute of limitations of ten years (this will be imposed on July 1, 2023). This is where the inviolable Don Juan Carlos I of Spain is addressed.

The counterfeit amounts for the IRPF concept amount to a total of undeclared and counterfeit quotas of € 2,339,553.02. The two tax offenses of the donation tax will be undeclared and defrauded fees of € 53,758,063. The total amount cheated is 56,097,616 euros. The facts that suggest this fraud are related to the $ 100 million “gift” received in 2008 and the interest and income received with this money in those years, which is a very large amount. In addition, the prosecutor’s office is collecting another “gift” from the Sultan of Bahrain in 2010, contributing 1,895,250 euros to Lukum’s account.

In addition to these seven crimes, the prosecution is analyzing as many others as possible. He argues that the monarch, as an authority figure or public servant, is prohibited from accepting any “gifts”, so his conduct is likely to combine the criminal nature of improper passive bribery with Article 422 of the Criminal Code. Especially in the amount of “gift” we are talking about. He mentions this in two “gifts” received from the Gulf countries, both in 2008 and 2010. This money is committed to the existence of authority and its function. And this means that this property is not being donated for this purpose, but “to provoke a state of gratitude in the recipient,” which will help him in the future. Therefore, we will add two more offenses. He rules out the data available to show that they paid him a commission for building an AVE in Mecca. However, if it is a “gift”, he pays for it, so in any case, he must pay taxes on it and the income received.

The prosecution also points to the possibility of money laundering under Article 301 of the Criminal Code, which recognizes that the crime “combines some behavior”, which in any case will be terminated in 2012. Recipe. It accurately indicates that the laundering was involved in the year when all the money received in Lucum’s accounts was transferred to Solare de Corinna’s account. Therefore, we are talking about a total of nine crimes committed and the door is open for money laundering. The absence of reprimands and prosecutions, other than prescriptions, is based on the fact that the whole of this criminal act agrees with the application of Article 56.3 of the Spanish Constitution, which is explained by the prosecution according to the doctrine of the Supreme Court (…).

The prosecution acknowledges that he has committed at least nine offenses and cannot be held criminally liable for not being investigated within the prescribed time and, in principle, protected by inviolability. No less striking is the notion of a “gift” which, if true, the king did not unite in the national heritage, but made it his own and without paying taxes.

Did King Emeritus really receive all these “gifts” from friends, cousins ​​and others, and was it altruistic? The monarch appears in many publications as the possessor of enormous wealth. Where is that money, spend nothing? A fundamental question is to know, indeed, ultimately, whether we are talking about the mechanisms of money, its origin, and its owner. Maybe someone decided to pay small regulated sums, instead of admitting that this property was entirely his and was also obtained in the years when the king was untouchable. We are a legacy susceptible to corrupt practices. And, if we look at the hidden fate hypothesis, it yields significant profits in the form of interest and the like. Just like any Spaniard declares his interests in a bank, he wonders what happens to the income and interests that such a large fortune produces?

The regulation regarding Zagatka may not be true or complete. As we present both the hypothesis of the discharge of great wealth, as well as the much more laconic fact: it has not been proved that in this case the IRPF is tax-appropriate and the donation tax may be as we find ourselves in the face of the new. The “gifts” as the king’s “cousin”, the lord of Orleans, have repeatedly stated.

And, apart from the technical explanation, it is a scandal that “King Emeritus” escaped all the described adventures. Plus others we probably do not know.