In recent developments surrounding a high-profile legal case in Betancuria, the attorney representing the defendants expressed a mix of resignation and optimism. When asked about the possibility of the case progressing to an oral trial, he conveyed confidence in the eventual outcome. The lawyer emphasized that he is “convinced” his clients “have not committed any” violations, openly stating their intention to reach this stage of the legal process: “We want the trial”.
Regarding the Allegations of Workplace Harassment
One of the most sensitive aspects of the case involves allegations of workplace harassment. The attorney, Miranda, noted that the appropriate protocol had been initiated at the onset of the investigation. However, he added that it was halted due to disagreements between the Cabildo de Fuerteventura and the Government of the Canary Islands. This interruption raises questions about the efficacy and enforcement of anti-harassment measures and the complexities that can arise between administrative bodies.
The Background of the Investigation
The inquiry into the actions of the Betancuria mayor commenced towards the end of last year, triggered by a prior complaint from the Prosecutor’s Office. This investigation zeroes in on alleged offenses, including continued administrative prevarication, embezzlement of public funds, and claims of workplace harassment. Initially, hearings for the defendants were scheduled for February 19 and later for March 27, both of which were eventually postponed to the current date of April 16.
Key elements under scrutiny include a payment authorized in August 2024, shortly after Cerdeña assumed the mayoralty. This payment involved a work certification exceeding €53,000, which had been categorized under municipal minor contracts. Notably, legal stipulations dictate a maximum threshold of €40,000 for such contracts concerning construction projects. The Prosecutor’s Office contends that the municipal council’s full assembly, not the mayor’s office, held the authority to approve this financial transaction.
Additional Irregularities
Compounding these concerns, the investigation also highlights the awarding of legal advisory roles via minor contracts to two external firms during the same period. This decision raised eyebrows since the municipality already employs a qualified civil servant who fulfills that role. Furthermore, the case delves into actions described as degrading and hostile towards this public servant. It’s alleged that she was systematically removed from procurement committees and regular processing of official documents, exacerbating the issues of workplace dynamics within the administration.
