Valencia (EFE) personal, that these jobs existed before they arrived at the company, and that the women they chose only carried out work related to this entity.
Thus, he explained that Imelsa’s management offered him the possibility of keeping the advisors that existed before or appointing different ones, and that he chose to change them.
Rubio, for whom the prosecutor is demanding a sentence of 6 years in prison, has testified as being investigated this Tuesday in the sixth session of the trial that is being followed in the Valencia Court for the piece of the Imelsa case, which investigates the irregular hiring of workers in the public companies Imelsa (provincial) and Ciegsa (autonomous).
“The PP directors had 4 advisers, the PSPV two and IU one”, explained Rafa Rubio, who reported that in 2010, again from the management of Imelsa, he was informed that the advisers had to be renewed due to a change in labor legislation, to prevent them from becoming permanent.
It was difficult to find advisers
«It was difficult for me to find people because the contract was only for four months, and I no longer went to the Valencia City Council on the PSPV lists because I went to Les Corts. Through an acquaintance I contacted Carolina de Miguel, a sociologist, and it was a surprise to see that she had worked for the PSOE in Madrid ».
Rubio has assured the prosecutor that this woman was passing him “notes”, and not “reports”, on issues that he requested, such as information on the gender gap in the forestry brigades or the situation of sports facilities in the towns of the province, “all issues related to Imelsa,” he stressed, “because there were already advisers from the socialist group in the Provincial Council.”
Asked by the prosecutor if he kept those notes, Rubio replied no, that when he left the Provincial Council he passed a dossier on to his successors and that “they would throw it away”, while calling attention to the fact that he They called to testify “five years after leaving the Provincial Council.”
Regarding the other supposed “plugged in” under his charge, Teresa Gimeno, Rubio has warned the court that “she is not the person you have seen these days” -who has fainted today-, but that “she was 61 years old and her head well furnished”, unlike today, since he suffers from a “cognitive disease”.
«I hired her for administrative tasks, on the telephone, especially in the afternoons, she also collected information from the digital newspapers…».
Questioned again by the prosecutor about whether he considers that this was an advisory task, Rubio has stated that “some will say yes, others no…”.
Finally, to questions from his lawyer, he has insisted that he did not write anything in the contract of the supposed “zombies” employees of Imelsa, nor did he have the ability to decide on the economic conditions. “In Imelsa there was a legal officer, an auditor and a secretary, who never made the slightest objection,” he concluded.
Before Rubio, the man who was mayor (PP) of Beniarjó between 1995 and 2015 and provincial deputy, Salvador Enguix, for whom the prosecutor claims the same sentence as Rubio for hiring personnel who allegedly did not go to work at Imelsa, has testified.
Asked about a supposed certificate signed by himself in which he supposedly certified the work of one of these “zombie” employees, Enguix has stated that “it seems that I did sign it”, since he has not denied that the signature was his , although he has admitted that possibly “he did it without reading, in a hurry.”
«I am not aware of having signed that. I have never requested the hiring of anyone, I did not even know that as an Imelsa director I had the right to an adviser, ”said this defendant, who has denied knowing anything about Eva Sarrión, the person whose work at Imelsa he supposedly certified.
Another of the alleged fictitious employees of Imelsa, Juan Antonio Sanz, has declared that the then manager of this public company, Marcos Benavent, and the president of the Diputación, Alfonso Rus, offered him the position of head of social networks for both entities in over the course of a lunch.
Asked by the prosecutor for proof of his work, in case he keeps the publications he made on social networks, this defendant has assured that he went to the Imelsa legal office when he found out that he was being investigated, to see if he could recover them, but that “or not knew or did not want to do it” and that they basically told him to “get by.”
The last of those investigated to testify was Clara Sáez, prosecuted as an alleged fictitious worker of the public company Ciegsa -dedicated to the construction of educational centers and dependent on the Ministry of Education-.
To questions from the prosecutor, Sáez explained that she entered the press office of the Ministry of Culture as an intern in 1998 and that after renewing on successive occasions and with different work formulas, she has been doing the same press work for different departments of the Ministry.
«In 2004 they told me that I was going to depend on Ciegsa, so I signed a new contract. It did not surprise me because I was already doing things for Ciegsa, because all the communication work was centralized in the Ministry of Education and my job was there. I didn’t know my contract was for senior management until I reviewed it for this court case. I really kept getting paid the same and doing the same job.”
To questions from her lawyer, this researcher has stressed that she worked at the Department of Education before the arrival of Máximo Caturla -investigated in this same case- at the regional Ministry of Education and continued afterwards. EFE