The mayor of Móstoles presents an appeal after the admission of the lawsuit filed against him for alleged sexual and workplace harassment

Manuel Bautista, the mayor of Móstoles, has filed an appeal before the Provincial Court of Madrid, against the decision of the judge who confirmed the admission for processing of the complaint filed against him, by a former PP councilwoman for an alleged case of sexual and workplace harassment, considering that the resolution lacks sufficient motivation and violates his right to effective judicial protection.

The defense requests the annulment of the order that dismissed the appeal for reform and asks that the admission of the complaint be rendered without effect, understanding that the resolution does not specify which facts can be attributed to the mayor, nor what are the indications that would justify the continuation of the procedure. The lawyer maintains that the court merely makes generic statements about the possible criminal relevance of the reported facts, without explaining how the elements of the investigated crimes concur.

The appeal also questions that the court found sufficient evidence to continue with the investigation. The defense states that the specific facts imputed to Bautista are not specified, nor are the investigations carried out that would support the existence of a criminal offense. Another of the main arguments of the appeal focuses on the validity of the complaint. Furthermore, the defense also maintains that it was filed without the special power of attorney required by article 277 of the Criminal Procedure Law and argues that said defect was incurable, so the court should never have admitted it for processing.

In this vein, the brief argues that allowing the subsequent contribution of the special power of attorney implies altering the legal requirements for the exercise of criminal action, because the express will of the complainant had to be recorded before or, at least, simultaneously with the filing of the complaint. It also argues that the opening of criminal proceedings produces procedural and reputational consequences that require special rigor in the control of legal requirements. For all this, the defense has ended up requesting the Provincial Court to uphold the appeal, declare the annulment of the appealed order, and agree to the dismissal of the procedure, considering that the complaint did not meet the legally required requirements and that the challenged judicial resolution lacks the necessary motivation to sustain the continuation of the case.