The case of O Marisquiño, the collapse of the Vigo wooden dock that during the attendees to a massive night concert, has taken an unexpected turn. The fifth section of the Pontevedra Audience has ordered its reopening and that again the focus on the possible responsibility of the City Council and Puerto de Vigo is given to a failed security system of the Paseo Marítimo. The Court has revoked the archive that decreed the Court of Instruction number 3 seven months ago, attending the appeal of five of the victims who were injured in the accident.
The court interprets that there was a false closure of the investigation of an accident that highlighted the precarious maintenance of the facilities and that since 2001 combines sports and urban culture sports. This judicial decision, governed by the socialist Abel Caballero, as for the Port Authority, an institution whose governance depends politically on the Xunta of the popular Alfonso Rueda. After the accident, both administrations avoid responsibilities for an ambiguous infrastructure maintenance agreement, called Open Vigo to the sea, since in practice it was found that it was not decisive to clarify the degree of involvement of each.
The Chamber considers that the instructor must specify the possible criminal responsibilities of several accused, both technicians from the City Council and the port of Vigo. And also “the possible infraction of the duty of care by the two public entities that have been called to trial in condition of subsidiary civil responsible.” The reopening of the case aims to elucidate who should maintain the structures that collapsed the car alludes to the lagoon that for the victims left their archive and forces the Court to determine whether to demand civil, direct or subsidiary liability, to any administration for the imputation of their employees or officials, in clear reference to the City Council and the Port Authority. The accusations must be outlined “based on their concrete assigned tasks and their intervention in the facts” and the criminal relevance must be distinguished “according to the public entity to which they belong,” the car is specified.
While those affected, represented by the lawyer Francisco Méndez Senlle, “they finally feel defended” by the judicial decision that opens the possibility of a trial, the City Council directed by Caballero, as a particular accusation and that has two investigated technicians, has avoided assessing the reopening of the case: “Our respect for justice”, municipal sources have commented. For its part, the Port Authority, which since 2023 is in the hands of Carlos Botana although he has usually been chaired by leading politicians of the Galician PP, has also shown “respect for the judicial decision” and has promised to collaborate with the investigation he put under his magnifying glass three officials of the institution.
Among the five investigated are chief engineers and managers of the port and City Council. The Pontevedra Hearing concludes that, after the years, no other was charged and, the term of instruction without new extensions, the judge cannot investigate anyone else. The appeal presented by the injured and that has prospered influenced the expert reports that and lack of conservation and maintenance of the structure that collapsed. A part of the injured agreed to hold the City Council responsible for omitting the risk notices given by the port.
The Superior Court of Xustiza de Galicia (TSXG), as the hearing affects its order to reopen the investigation, concluded that it was municipal obligation to conserve the equity object of the agreement signed with the port in 1992, which would transfer to its scope the maintenance of the structures in which the accident occurred. “It is evident that these precautions or maintenance standards were not fulfilled in this case, in which there was a complete omission of the revisions that required the structures and that had been initially established, as results from the expert reports practiced,” says the audience. And it emphasizes that, although there is no maintenance obligation of the regulation concrete structure, “they did exist in the project for review and surveillance at least 10 years.”
The magistrates indicate that, in this case, it has been used that “there was neither express regulation, nor is there a Lex Artist that force to maintain concrete structures of the Spanish or Galician ports, or to inspect their state. “However, they emphasize that said statement” is not sustained, from the moment in which with its omission the right to life and the physical and moral integrity of the citizens established in article 15 of the Constitution, or the duty of the public powers of protection of protection of the health and to facilitate the adequate use of the public Leisure. ”The car, which is firm, argues that the right to use and enjoy public goods and services would also be violated by the consequent need for patrimony conservation, and invokes the Law of the Heritage of Galicia, the Royal Decree approved by the Regulation of Assets of Local Entities, as well as“ other multiple regulations, which also regulate the scope of concessions and agreements ”.
