The head of the Court of Instruction number 41 of Madrid has cited the managing director of the Municipal Transport Company (EMT), Alfonso Sánchez, and the entity’s contracting officer as being investigated for allegedly having awarded a contract of 72,000 euros to the digital medium Ok Diary for the organization of some conferences.
In a ruling dated January 11, to which La Vanguardia has had access, the instructor admits to processing a complaint filed by Podemos for an alleged crime of embezzlement included in article 432 of the Penal Code. Along with the two heads of the EMT, the publishing company of the media outlet is also cited as being investigated for April 26. The judge has requested documentation from the Tax Agency and the Commercial Registry.
As reflected in the complaint of the purple formation, the EMT, a public company of the Madrid City Council, directed by José Luis Martínez-Almeida, awarded the editor of Okdiario a contract for the negotiated procedure without advertising on December 24, 2022 to holding a conference on sustainable mobility.
Podemos emphasizes that the hiring was done by hand and considers it “surprising” that a company that is not even dedicated to organizing events was chosen. The complaint explains that the contract amounted to 60,000 euros plus VAT, four times more than what the EMT paid for practically identical days just a month and a half earlier to another company.
For this reason, the complaint considers that there is an “overprice” in the award. “There is no a priori justification for the surcharge, such that said price could be unrealistic and mask a different purpose,” he points out in the document that has now been admitted for processing.
The complaint maintains that the communication company advertised the days before they had been awarded. Once he obtained the contract, always according to the complainants, he subcontracted the tasks to be carried out to another company for an amount of 22,469 euros.
For Podemos, after subcontracting, there was an extra cost that “remains without documentary justification or explanation in the tender” and that indirectly “does not reflect a real and effective cost.”
