Alvise: Supreme Court Investigates Threat Allegations Against Algeciras Mayor

Supreme Court Opens Fifth Investigation into MEP ‘Alvise’ Pérez Over Alleged Threats to Algeciras Mayor

The Spanish Supreme Court has opened a formal investigation into Luis Pérez Fernández, known as ‘Alvise’, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP), following a complaint filed by the mayor of Algeciras, José Antonio Landaluce, concerning alleged conditional threats. The investigation centers on accusations that Alvise threatened to publicly release damaging information about Landaluce unless he resigned from his position. This marks the fifth legal case opened against the MEP in the past year, raising questions about the escalating legal challenges facing the politician and the implications for his parliamentary work.

The Sala Penal (Criminal Chamber) of the Supreme Court initiated the proceedings on March 10th, designating magistrate Antonio del Moral as the investigating judge. While the initial complaint encompassed accusations of both coercion and conditional threats, the court has, at this stage, found sufficient grounds to proceed solely with the investigation into the alleged threats.

What the Investigation Focuses On

According to a court document accessed by laSexta, the Supreme Court believes there are “rational indications” of a potential crime of conditional threats, as defined in Article 169.1 of the Spanish Penal Code. The court’s assessment stems from the content of the complaint, alongside supporting documentation, specifically screenshots and electronic certifications of publications made on Alvise’s public Telegram channel.

Specifically, the court alleges that Alvise repeatedly announced his intention to disseminate audio recordings, documents, and conversation screenshots purportedly revealing Landaluce’s “allegedly criminal or gravely dishonorable” behavior. Crucially, these announcements were explicitly linked to the mayor’s resignation; the dissemination of the materials was presented as contingent upon Landaluce stepping down from his role. The court highlighted the “conditional structure” of the announcements, the stated availability of the materials, and even the mention of timelines for potential publication as key factors supporting the investigation.

Confirmed vs. Unclear Details

At this point, it’s important to distinguish between what has been confirmed by the Supreme Court and what remains unclear.

Confirmed:

• The Supreme Court has opened a formal investigation into Alvise regarding alleged threats against Mayor Landaluce.
• Magistrate Antonio del Moral has been appointed as the investigating judge.
• The investigation is based on a complaint filed by Mayor Landaluce and evidence from Alvise’s Telegram channel.
• The court has found initial indications supporting the charge of conditional threats, but not coercion.

Unclear:

• The specific content of the audio recordings, documents, and screenshots Alvise allegedly threatened to release has not been publicly disclosed.
• The exact nature of the “allegedly criminal or gravely dishonorable” behaviors Landaluce was accused of remains unspecified.
• The potential consequences of the investigation, beyond the possibility of charges being filed, are currently unknown.
• The timeline for the investigation’s completion has not been established.

Background: Alvise and Previous Legal Challenges

This latest investigation adds to a growing list of legal challenges facing Luis Pérez Fernández, commonly known as Alvise. He is a prominent figure associated with the “Se Acabó la Fiesta” (SALF) political movement, known for its anti-establishment stance and focus on transparency and accountability. Still, Alvise’s outspoken style and confrontational tactics have frequently landed him in legal trouble.

This is the fifth case opened against him by the Supreme Court in the last year. In two previous cases, the court requested a suplicatorio – a formal request to the European Parliament – to authorize legal proceedings against Alvise, given his status as an MEP. The suplicatorio process is necessary to waive parliamentary immunity and allow Spanish authorities to fully investigate and potentially prosecute an MEP. The Poder Judicial website provides further details on the process.

How the Spanish Legal Process Works in Cases Involving MEPs

When a Member of the European Parliament is implicated in a criminal investigation within a member state like Spain, a specific legal procedure must be followed to ensure the MEP’s parliamentary rights are respected. This process centers around the suplicatorio.

1. Investigation Initiated: Spanish authorities, in this case, the Supreme Court, initiate an investigation.
2. Parliamentary Immunity: MEPs enjoy certain immunities to protect them from politically motivated prosecution and ensure they can freely carry out their parliamentary duties.
3. Request for Waiver: If the investigation requires actions that would normally be protected by parliamentary immunity (such as arrest, search, or prosecution), the Spanish authorities must request a waiver of that immunity from the European Parliament. This request is known as a suplicatorio.
4. Parliamentary Review: The European Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee reviews the request and assesses whether it meets the necessary legal criteria.
5. Parliamentary Vote: The full European Parliament then votes on whether to grant the waiver of immunity.
6. National Proceedings: If the Parliament grants the waiver, the national authorities can proceed with their investigation and potential prosecution of the MEP.

Political and Strategic Implications

The opening of this fifth investigation against Alvise is likely to have significant political ramifications. It reinforces the narrative, promoted by his political opponents, of a politician who operates outside the bounds of legal and ethical norms. It also raises questions about the sustainability of his position as an MEP, particularly if the Parliament continues to grant waivers of immunity allowing the investigations to proceed.

the case could fuel the broader political debate surrounding freedom of speech, the use of social media for political communication, and the boundaries between legitimate criticism and unlawful threats. The outcome of this investigation will undoubtedly be closely watched by political observers and legal experts alike.

What Happens Next?

The immediate next step is for Magistrate Antonio del Moral to conduct a thorough investigation, gathering evidence and hearing testimony from relevant parties. This will likely involve examining Alvise’s Telegram channel in detail, interviewing witnesses, and potentially requesting information from the mayor of Algeciras.

The length of the investigation is uncertain, but it could take several months or even years to complete. Once the investigation is concluded, the magistrate will issue a report recommending whether or not to bring charges against Alvise. The final decision on whether to prosecute will rest with the Supreme Court. La Vanguardia provides ongoing coverage of the case.