In a formal communication from the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Valencian Community, the focus centers on the actions surrounding Vice President Mónica Oltra. The document scrutinizes her role as head of the Department for Inclusive Policies and alleges a connection to a custody case involving an alleged minor victim. The emphasis is on whether there were efforts to conceal or downplay the events, and on the question of how responsible officials should act when serious harms are reported. The analysis presented is grounded in a detailed review of the case materials and the procedures followed by the courts and prosecutors involved.
The prosecutor references a case file from the 15th Criminal Court of Peace in Valencia, arguing that a premeditated strategy existed to obscure and undermine the credibility of the abuse report made by the minor. The document points to an alleged verbal directive attributed to Oltra, described as an instruction from a superior to subordinate officials, which, according to the filing, was not reduced to writing because of concerns about its legality. The claim suggests a parallel information channel was created to challenge the judicial narrative and to cast doubt on the integrity of the proceedings. The language used in the filing portrays the actions as an attempt to influence the trajectory of the investigation outside the formal judicial process.
From the perspective of the investigation, the failure to report the alleged facts by a key actor is treated as a serious omission. The timeline notes that the matter gained attention only after police intervention following the minor’s escape, and it was subsequently referred to the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office for appropriate action. The chronology underlines how critical timing can affect the handling of abuse allegations and the protection of a child in distress, raising questions about duty of care and the obligations of public officials to report suspected crimes promptly.
The document further critiques what it calls the Ministry’s stance as incoherent and puzzling, suggesting that the underlying motive may be tied to the personal and professional connections within the leadership. It is asserted that the person reported to be responsible for the abuses is the spouse of the vice president and held a leadership position within the same department, a fact that the filing argues could bias perceptions of accountability and influence. The prose in the submission reflects concern about conflicts of interest, transparency, and the integrity of the investigative process, especially when powerful actors are involved in matters of alleged wrongdoing against a minor. The language conveys a call for rigorous scrutiny, clear documentation, and adherence to the rule of law to ensure that all parties are treated with fairness while safeguarding the rights of the victim and the public interest.