Eight months had passed since the scheduled session for discussion and decision, which took place at the end of last February, and the Supreme Court’s first hearing in Brugal’s case progressed without a ruling for a long time. The case concerns irregularities in the awarding of garbage collection and street cleaning contracts involving Orihuela City Council. In a separate track, a case that ended with the acquittal of 34 defendants in the Alicante Court between 2000 and 2008 continues to generate questions about how the process was handled. Former mayors from the town’s PP faction, José Manuel Medina and Mónica Lorente, saw telephone interceptions and searches canceled on grounds that they violated fundamental rights. These developments shaped a legal narrative that the parties argued over during appeals and reconsiderations. [Source: Alicante Court records]
The June 2020 sentence was appealed by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, which urged the Supreme Court to require a fresh hearing. Instead, the case was referred to a different court, which did not share the invalidity criterion that left the prosecution’s theses unsupported. The contrast between courts underscored ongoing questions about due process and evidentiary standards throughout the proceedings. [Attribution: Court documents]
Alicante’s PGOU processes and Calp’s dump were condemned without knowing the Supreme Court’s criteria
After preliminary indications suggested postponement due to courtroom workload rather than the substance of the matter, the appeal was finally deliberated and decided on 28 February. Judge Ana Ferrer presided, assisted by colleagues who formed a close circle around the bench. Andrés Martínez, Andrés Palomo, Leopoldo Puente, and Vicente Magro contributed to the deliberations as part of the Alicante panel. [Judicial records]
Since then, the Supreme Court has issued orders expanding this authority on at least two occasions. The deadline to deliver the sentence was extended—from ten days to two months initially, and then, in mid-May, another month was granted. The extensions reflected ongoing attempts to align timing with the evolving doctrine of the Supreme Court. [Source: Supreme Court directives]
Yet, since those orders, there has been little public communication from the parties about any further extension or the current status of a decision. Optimism remains tempered, with phrases like “in the coming weeks” used sparingly as a cautious forecast. [Court communications]
Don’t wait any longer
More than just Brugal’s case is awaiting resolution. Thirty-four individuals were acquitted, and finality remained pending for them as well as for Medina and Lorente. An Orihuela-based waste-management entrepreneur, Melek Fenoll, figures prominently in the records that spurred the operation and, in the end, led to charges against others. The case docket includes around twenty separate pieces tied to these proceedings. [Docket summaries]
In a parallel state of tension, thirteen defendants faced allegations of irregularities in the procedures surrounding the Vega Baja landfill award. This separate process, distinct from Brugal, spanned fifteen years of investigation and six months of trial. Article VII of the Criminal Code framed the outcome, and the Alicante Court moved Elche’s involvement into focus almost a year and a half ago amid the 2022 bonfires. [Legislation references]
Fenoll and former Lorente figures appear among those on trial, alongside José Joaquín Ripoll, the former PP provincial president, and businessmen Enrique Ortiz and Rafael Gregory, along with former socialist politician Antonio Amorós. Some demands in the case stretch toward thirty years in prison. The panel that must decide ultimately includes Judges Joaquín Orellana, Cristina Ferrández, and Javier Saravia. The second judge, acting as rapporteur, delayed decisions to await the Supreme Court’s position on the telephone interceptions and the records canceled by colleagues in Elche. Gracia Serrano and José Teófilo Jiménez are also named, with Manel Martínez Aroca serving as a speaker. [Court roster]
Other courts
Other Alicante Tribunal courts, which also handled Brugal-related processes, opted to issue rulings without waiting for the Supreme Court’s doctrine. This divergence helps explain the concurrent verdicts in the PGOU fraud inquiry and the Calpe waste allocation irregularities. Fenoll emerges again as a common thread in those cases, linking multiple defendants across the docket. [Judicial summaries]
Both matters resulted in convictions. In July 2021, Ortiz and Luis Díaz Alperi, the former Alicante mayor from the PP, were implicated in the PGOU case; in October last year, former Calp councilor Javier Morató and former councilors Roselló and Peneda faced charges, with one linked to a family member of an Orihuela businessman in the latter case. The current status of these decisions remains in the Supreme Court’s queue, with no public record yet confirming whether they will be accepted for processing. [Case status reports]