Ángel Ron, former president of Banco Popular, appeals his prosecution alleging “absence of criminal action” in his administration | EUROtoday

The former president of Banco Popular Angel Ron has appealed in opposition to his prosecution for alleged fraud within the entity's capital enhance in 2016, making certain that the investigation by the National Court has revealed “the absence of any indication of criminal action” in his administration.

This is evident from a useful resource, to which you’ve had entry Europa Presswhich Ron's lawyer directs in opposition to the choose's determination Jose Luis Calama to prosecute him, twelve different administrators and the consulting agency PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) for crimes of defrauding buyers and accounting falsehood within the 2016 capital enhance.

The head of the Central Court of Instruction Number 4, particularly, maintains in his order to maneuver to an abbreviated process that the buyers got here to this operation “deceived”, because the monetary statements of that yr and 2015 “did not reflect the true image of the balance sheet or equity”.

Ron's protection, nevertheless, assures that “the incriminating thesis established by the Court is the result of ignoring the abundant exculpatory evidence, notably the evidence of experts, including judicial ones, prepared by officials of the Bank of Spain.”

“The actions of supervisory entities, such as the Bank of Spain, European Central Bank, the FROB, and the CNMV must be taken into account beyond considerations based on subjective positions and perceptions, their performance in the exercise of those powers (including sanctioning powers) cannot be questioned,” he maintains.

“Lacks rational basis”

From his standpoint, “if conclusions were reached regardless of the existence of this supervisory action, there would be a risk of ignoring the established and prevailing guarantees” within the authorized and monetary system, “replacing them with evaluative judgments that would have to be considered at least incomplete or partial”.

Thus, it considers “extremely dangerous to disregard and disregard the opinions and instructions that Banco Popular was simultaneously receiving from the Bank of Spain and the European Central Bank, which have seen their reflection in the case through the communications sent by the aforementioned organisms”.

At this level, he regrets that the Justice of the Peace accepts “exclusively retrospective, opportunistic and conniving criteria with the inertia of a procedure, which has ignored the indications and evidence of exculpatory and legality that supported the entire management of the entity”.

Furthermore, Ron's illustration states that “it cannot be disregarded that the financial statements prior to the capital increase were duly audited and reviewed without qualifications not only by PwC but also that the correct accounting of the provisions on credits and real estate was analyzed by KPMG , and the results of its analysis were provided to the directors for their information during the approval process of the 2016 capital increase.”

In brief, the previous president's protection considers that the appealed order “lacks rational basis, “it doesn’t correspond to the target results of the investigation proceedings and dispenses with considerable documentary, testimonial and considerably professional proof, to base the incriminating thesis on a specific and subjective imaginative and prescient of banking laws and practices.”

All of this, he provides, makes it “an unfair decision, which have to be reformed, avoiding an pointless oral trial, which causes critical hurt” to Ron.

The choose's order

In addition to Ron and PwC, the magistrate proposed placing the former vice president of the entity on the bench Roberto Higuera, the former CEO of the bank Francisco Gómez, and the audit partners of the consulting firm Pedro Barrio, José María Sanz Olmeda. Also to the former directors of the bank Javier Moreno, José María Sagardoy, Jesús Arellano, Antonio Pujol, José Ramón Alonso, Francisco Juan Sancha and Tomás Pereira.

Throughout 178 pages, the magistrate considers it proven that on May 25, 2016, the Board of Directors of Banco Popular, chaired by Ángel Ron, decided to carry out and execute the capital increase agreed upon at the General Shareholders' Meeting on May 11. April. Prior to that meeting, he explains, a meeting of the Board's Audit Committee took place that same day, whose second item on the agenda was “the approval of a good report for the capital enhance.”

The resolution indicates that the Audit Commission issued a report favorable to the expansion, without having any detailed written study that could be the subject of debate. The external auditors PwC were present at that meeting, and they did not warn the members of said commission of any problem in Popular's accounts (annual-2015- and quarterly-2016-) in view of the capital increase.

Regarding the capital increase brochure, the order explains, “consciously altered monetary data is obtainable – which hid huge provision deficits from buyers – taken from the annual accounts for 2015 audited by PwC and the monetary statements as of 03/31/2016 with restricted report from stated auditor.

Calama assures that if the provisions not mirrored therein had been mirrored within the stability sheets of Banco Popular – as of December 31, 2015 and March 31, 2016 – “the accounting result of the profit and loss account would have shown at least 2,500 million losses, instead of the profits declared” by the entity, other than considerably altering quite a few ratios of the accounts, that are utilized by buyers for his or her monetary evaluation.

The Justice of the Peace makes it clear in his decision that PwC didn’t document any {qualifications} in its audit report on the 2015 annual accounts, nor within the interim monetary statements as of March 31, 2016.