The National Court demands that Judge Pedraz order the arrest of Obiang's son

The National Court has ordered Judge Santiago Pedraz to issue national and international arrest warrants against Carmelo Ovono Obiang, son of the president of Equatorial Guinea Teodoro Obiang, and two other senior officials in the country.

The second section of the Criminal Court has upheld an appeal filed by relatives of several opponents, considering “appropriate” the arrest of these senior officials, against whom the judge is directing a case for the alleged kidnapping and torture of four opponents in November 2019.

In addition to the president's son, current Secretary of State of the Presidency of Equatorial Guinea, the decision affects the director of the Presidency Security, Isaac Nguema, and the Minister of State, Nicolás Obama. The complaint that gave rise to the procedure, born in 2020, was directed against them.

The judge agreed to send this procedure to Equatorial Guinea, although this decision is not yet final, since both the Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution appealed it to the Criminal Chamber, which has not yet ruled.

“In a situation of rebellion”

Although the Chamber specifies that its order does not resolve anything about the jurisdiction or not of the National Court, it does mention in its argument that there are resolutions of the judge that “clearly explain the reasons why the Spanish jurisdiction would be indirectly competent.” .

In the order known this Thursday, dated February 19, the court revokes the magistrate's decision – also appealed by the Prosecutor's Office – to reject the arrest of the son of Obiang and Isaac Nguema, who, “it is evident” that they are in ” situation of rebellion” in a case, he adds, that “has provided enough data that points” to his “possible involvement” in the events under investigation.

The court refers to the police proceedings and the monitoring of those investigated, “whose presence in Spain has been confirmed”, as well as the possible relationship with the detective agency involved in the monitoring of the victims.. He also recalls the investigations into “transfers of significant amounts of money in Spanish banking entities, cash whose relationship with the events has also been the subject of investigation.”

“They have ignored the calls”

He questions that Judge Santiago Pedraz did not give “any reason” that justified “in a reasoned manner” his refusal to issue arrest warrants against both, who have “disregarded the calls to appear” by the judge, “despite having even been provided with the possibility of appearing via videoconference”.

It happened, the magistrates explain, when the judge summoned the defendants to testify last year and allowed them to do so electronically from Equatorial Guinea, although all of them refused to appear. The Chamber emphasizes that, despite the fact that they were “appropriately summoned” and that they were even offered the possibility of testifying by videoconference, something that in itself prevented “the immediate adoption of precautionary measures,” they refused to appear.

And at that time “there was no conflict of jurisdiction that would imply the loss of jurisdiction” of the National Court, as they alleged.. The court, which criticizes in its order the “obstructive attitude” that those investigated have had, reminds Pedraz, therefore, that until there is a firm decision on the jurisdiction of the case “the processing of the case can continue” with the practice of proceedings, including the declaration of the defendants and the “issuance of search and arrest warrants for interested parties.”