The imprisonment of Alfredo de Miguel, sentenced to 9 years in prison for leading a corruption scheme in Álava, settles the most mediatic episode of political corruption in the recent history of the Basque Country. The one who was number two of the PNV in Álava has entered the Zaballa prison around 9:00 in the morning, within the limit to set foot in prison that a court order had established and that expired today.
De Miguel was finally sentenced last January, although he has been delaying his imprisonment since then and has even requested a pardon from the central government.
On Monday, however, the court in charge of supervising the execution of the sentence gave a 72-hour ultimatum to De Miguel and Koldo Otxandiano, another of the main convicted of this plot, to enter prison. Otherwise, the court would have ordered his arrest and subsequent admission to a prison.
In May, Xabier Sánchez Robles, former director of Youth of the Basque Government and also convicted of the ‘De Miguel case’, entered prison. In this way, the only one of the four sentenced to prison terms for this plot that is still on the street is Aitor Telleria, who has alleged health problems and several tests are still pending.
Alfredo de Miguel, Koldo Otxandiano, Aitor Telleria and Xabier Sánchez Robles were the main convicts in this case and the only ones who have entered or should enter prison.
The first of them, Txitxo de Miguel, became the number two of the PNV in Álava and held public positions such as that of local government deputy. Otxandiano also belonged to the Executive of the PNV in Álava and was manager of the Álava Institute of Social Welfare.
Aitor Telleria was also a member of the PNV Executive in Álava, as well as a jeltzale councilor in Vitoria-Gasteiz or attorney at the Álava General Meetings. Sánchez-Robles, for his part, was director of Youth and Social Action of the Basque Government.
The Supreme Court sentenced De Miguel in January to 12 years and 4 months, with a maximum effective term in prison of 9 years, for crimes of illicit association, passive bribery, prevarication and embezzlement. The Supreme Court slightly reduced the sentence handed down in the first instance by the Álava Court, by acquitting him of one of the four crimes of influence peddling.
The Supreme Court ratified a sentence of 7 years and 6 months in prison for Koldo Otxandiano, and 7 years and 1 month for Xabier Sánchez Robles.
In the case of Aitor Tellería, the Supreme Court reduced his sentence from 6 years and 6 months to 5 years and one month in prison, after being acquitted of his responsibility as a necessary cooperator in a crime of influence peddling in one of the awarded contracts.
The judicial route of the ‘De Miguel case’ began on December 2, 2009. Then, the businesswoman and lawyer Ainhoa ??Alberdi denounced before the Álava Prosecutor’s Office that Alfredo de Miguel requested a commission of 100,000 euros for a contract in the park technological center of Miñano, close to Vitoria-Gasteiz. Alberdi’s role was key in the case, since she even provided recordings that showed corrupt practices.
The facts denounced are expressive of what is, in short, the ‘De Miguel case’: a case of bites, of illegal commissions, from which different people linked to the spheres of power in Álava profited, most of them PNV militants in alava.
The germ of the plot is the company Kataia Consulting, created by De Miguel, Telleria and Otxandiano to camouflage the commissions from which they profited. It was created in 2005 in the name of the three wives of these politicians and had no ordinary activity, beyond its work as a front company.
The plot, in any case, was acquiring a greater dimension and the convicts created other companies to hide the commissions, estimated in many cases at 4%.
The Supreme Court ruling indicates that to cover up the collection of commissions, the defendants formed several companies that billed fictitious services to the benefited businessmen, under the ownership of front men, to pretend that they were not their property.
The Supreme Court also condemned the ringleaders of the plot for influencing some of the administrative contracts to be directly awarded to their companies, to the point that the Administration paid them for work that they never carried out.
