Rachid Mohamed, lawyer for the 'Mediator': "I gave my client a choice: defense or show. He chose the first"

Rachid Mohamed Hammu moves through the Mediator case with firmness and an advantageous vision of the courts. The lawyer of the man who gives his name to the plot, Marco Antonio Navarro Tacoronte, dominates the breadth of Justice because he has been in its most important boxes: as a judge, as a prosecutor and now as a lawyer.

It is the reverse of his client, whom he has subjected to isolation that, he understands, should have accompanied him since the matter was made public.. Owner of a discreet inaccessibility, he grants this interview fleeing from all hyperbole and with the conviction of being able to purify the matter.

Is Marco Antonio Navarro Tacoronte as indomitable as he seems? Since I've known him, he doesn't do anything without consulting me and he follows all the instructions I give him. I don't know how it was before. Why did you agree to defend him? When a criminal lawyer is offered the possibility of intervening in one of the most important corruption proceedings in Spain in which such important elements as a former deputy and a retired Civil Guard general appeared, looks like a challenge. It seemed like there was a lot of procedural complexity and that was a challenge for me.. In its day it was presented to me like this, but later I have verified that this sophistication is not appreciated in the organization. Apart from all this, my client always showed me a lot of willingness, a lot of respect and that encouraged me.. What is the Mediator case? Journalistically it is one of the biggest corruption scandals and judicially it is difficult for me to define it because I do not know if it is a single case or several. What was initially presented as an organized structure that aimed to commit crimes, has now been separated into pieces: one has been referred to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, others are secret. At this procedural moment, I don't know if there is a connection between them or not.. We would not be talking about a case of organized corruption, but about various criminal episodes that will be judged independently. Are you saying that the matter is not sustained? As it is being proposed right now, not because of the knowledge that I have of the procedure. Why? ?As it is presented in the media and socially, the vision that is held of the case of that hierarchical group, with two heads that organize a series of crimes that are going to be committed later, is not maintained. From the actions, this sophistication in that organization is not appreciated. Yes, there may be criminal acts, but not in that way in which it is proposed. The proceedings point to a former PSOE deputy, Juan Bernardo Fuentes Curbelo, using his position to do business…. That is what appears and is the reason why this procedure is so publicly relevant. There are reports from the Police that affirm this, but from there to talk about an organization with that complexity… The forcefulness of the Udef reports contradicts what you say. They speak of an organized structure and the judge of a “criminal organization”. I do not deny the reality of what the reports say, but I believe that as we have been shown, with that magnitude, with that degree of importance, with that distribution of roles It seems that it is a criminal organization created to commit crimes and that, in my opinion, is going to be very difficult to justify.. What I criticize as a lawyer is the form of the procedure, especially due to the procedural attitude towards my client. There is a reality and I imagine that there will be some type of irregularities because if not, it would not make sense. Navarro Tacoronte raised suspicions about other deputies, can you provide evidence to support those statements that you made in the media? I am unaware of the accusations and I try not to see what happened and what he said. My strategy, my personal one, does not involve involving anyone. I am focused on his defense because he is facing important crimes that carry many years in prison. My objective is, if not to obtain his acquittal, to minimize all the criminal reproach. The rest I don't care. I have no relationship with any political party. I'm independent. So, can your client prove these accusations or can't? I haven't even raised it with him. I am thinking about other things of a procedural nature and working on the irregularities that I have noticed. What are they? You even went so far as to ask for rigor. What was he referring to? When he spoke of rigor, he did so both in form and substance. For example, in the way of referring to my defendant. In a hearing room they have referred to him in a derogatory way. It is about a man who is being investigated, true, but his innocence is still presumed. In addition, the magistrate has made some statements that are inappropriate for someone of her position. You cannot pronounce on criminal records. I asked for rigor in the forms. Regarding the merits, there are people linked to my client who have been arrested when it is clearly seen that they were not related to the case. The case has been secret for more than a year and the files were claimed in February. What is rigorous in a procedure of these characteristics is that, if we are going to investigate crimes, the correct thing to do is to first analyze the files to see if there are signs of irregularity. He maintains that it has been magnified. Absolutely. It is not necessary to minimize importance because it has it. Whenever there is a crime in which authorities are involved, it must be given the importance it deserves and all the reproach that fits this particular type of conduct. It has been magnified because elements that are procedurally irrelevant but which are socially striking have transcended. When he took over, he also slipped that there were form defects in the instruction. Almost always in all instructions there are form defects but I think that in this one there are some that are decisive, that may have some effectiveness within the procedure. We will assert them and they can turn the matter around. Your latest requests point to the origin of the investigation, access to your client's mobile phones, what scope could they have? I think that the pillar on which the cause is sustained, or the causes, is the access to their mobiles. I must question everything that happens in the procedure and the irregularities in the origin are usually decisive and in this case there are. I said it before, there may be surprises. You deactivated your client from public life after a very expansive television route. I think that if we are going to demand respect, we have to give an adequate image. We cannot lend ourselves to any type of media spectacle that, moreover, does not bring us anything positive. I gave him a choice: show or defense. And he chose. Do you trust that you can blow up the Mediator case? Yes, I do, in fact they hired me for that. I hope for a good result. Are you worried that your client's overexposure makes him less serious in court? He hasn't had any kind of influence on the proceedings. Media overexposure must be taken care of from an image and seriousness point of view. Keep in mind that I am only the lawyer, I give legal advice. I cannot control the extra-procedural reality or what my client wants to do outside. Are you worried about what may be to come? A judicial procedure is like a surgical intervention. No matter how innocuous it may seem at first, there is always a risk and that must be assumed.. We are in a procedure with a lot of media pressure, with a lot of political pressure. It's complicated. If you didn't have all this around you, it would be a very normal procedure with many defense possibilities. You have dealt with cases of special complexity. It is in the case of masks from the Canary Islands. Are there names that are interconnected with the Mediator? That issue is much more complex. I thought the Mediator case was infinitely more complex, but I was wrong. Masks is a complex public procurement issue because it occurs at a certain time and as delicate as the state of alarm, with a specific regulation that was the Covid. There are no names connected. They have nothing to do with it. At least, for now. The number of actors involved in the investigation is surprising.. The cause is what it is. I am also surprised that so many people are working on a procedure like this. I sincerely believe that he does not deserve it. I dont know what has happened.

Is there a risk that the process will take forever? That risk is always in Justice. It must be taken into account that it is a peculiar procedure. There are many bodies and institutions involved to assist the judge. It has a reinforcement magistrate, has the collaboration or assistance of the National Police, Internal Affairs of the Civil Guard, the Tax Agency and the General State Intervention. So I can only trust that this disbursement and this investment that is going to be made in the procedure will result in speed in the investigation. Is the Mediator used as a throwing weapon?
Completely. Every day there is news even if there is not. Whenever there is an investigation and a politician is involved, the judicial procedure is used as a thrown weapon. Always. And that makes the process quite difficult.
Because?
Because there are political pressures and there everyone tries to use the resources at their disposal for political attrition and this is a particularly difficult year. Mediator is a pretty hot topic that I think they're exploiting.