The CGPJ files the complaint against the judge in the DANA case for the alleged interference of her husband

The judge investigating the dana case has just scored a victory in the fight she maintains against the defenses of those investigated, the former Valencian counselor Salomé Pradas and the former regional secretary Emilio Argüeso. Both had filed a complaint with the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) to denounce the alleged interference of the husband of Judge Nuria Ruiz Tobarra. The CGPJ, however, has decided to shelve the matter by filing the complaint.

This was confirmed this Tuesday by the Judiciary itself, which has reported that the Permanent Commission has "unanimously" taken cognizance of the agreement by which the Promoter of Disciplinary Action archives the information procedure open to the magistrate holding position number 3 of the Investigation Section of the Court of Instance of Catarroja.

"The agreement rules out that there is evidence with the degree of solidity and certainty that is required to consider proven the participation of a magistrate other than the holder of the judicial position in the practice of the diligence of offering actions and declaration of two victims in the serious floods of October 2024," according to the CGPJ, which thus invalidates the recording that was made of the magistrate's husband supposedly taking statements from some victims.

The CGPJ considers that this "only element of evidence" was recorded by the injured parties themselves "without prior consent of the judicial authority or the lawyer of the Administration of Justice and without the knowledge of the lawyer who assisted them." According to the Promoter, this circumstance "in itself invalidates the recording", since the law establishes the confidential nature of criminal investigation proceedings. That is to say, "its surreptitious capture introduces an element of irregularity that casts serious doubts on its value in a hypothetical disciplinary file."

Furthermore, the Promoter remembers that the existence of a sound file is not enough, but that it is "essential to have its authenticity, its complete traceability and its correspondence with the facts that are intended to be proven." In this sense, it is highlighted that both the Catarroja judge and the lawyer from the Administration of Justice and the official from the procedural management body have questioned and denied the reported facts.

Finally, the Promoter points out the "relevant time lapse" of almost a year that has elapsed since the making of the statements and the disclosure of the recordings through a media outlet. This factor, as he explains, adds "uncertainty about the purpose and context of the audio contribution."