Criminal judge Blanca Rosa Mármol pointed out that every person summoned by the Public Prosecutor’s Office must be informed of the capacity in which he or she will testify. If he or she is summoned as an accused, he or she may choose not to testify.
“There are no interviews in criminal investigations,” said attorney Blanca Rosa Mármol, magistrate emeritus of the Supreme Court of Justice, referring to the summons that the Attorney General’s Office issued to Edmundo González Urrutia for this Monday, August 26 at 10:00 a.m.
According to the document issued by the Prosecutor’s Office, the opposition presidential candidate is summoned to “give an interview” in relation to the facts being investigated regarding the publication and maintenance of the website “https://resultadosconvzla.com/” for the alleged commission of the crimes of usurpation of functions, forgery of public documents, instigation to disobedience of laws, computer crimes, criminal association and conspiracy.
The criminal judge explained, in a post on her account on the social network X, that statements are made as a witness or as an accused.
In this regard, any person summoned by the Public Prosecutor’s Office must be informed of the capacity in which he or she will testify. The lawyer points out that if one is summoned as an accused, one can choose not to testify.
There are no interviews in criminal investigations. There are statements as a witness or as a defendant. The person must be informed of the status in which he or she is testifying. If he or she is a defendant, he or she may choose not to testify.
— White Marble Rose (@BMarmoldeLeon) August 25, 2024
Tarek William Saab, the prosecutor appointed by the defunct constituent assembly, announced on Friday, August 23, that González Urrutia would be summoned in the next few hours. This Saturday, through the account on Instagram the institution’s summons was disseminated.
Later, from the account in X With the Giving Mallet The summons to González Urrutia was posted using derogatory labels in reference to the opposition leadership.
The recent call by the Supreme Court to all presidential candidates and representatives of political parties to submit electoral documents on August 7 was also questioned for the way it was carried out, as the reason for the summons was not explained, nor was the condition in which they should attend.
In response to this call, González Urrutia denounced “defenselessness” and “violation of due process“, which is why he did not attend the summons of the Electoral Chamber.
Irregularities in the summons of the Prosecutor’s Office
Following the publication of the summons on the MP’s Instagram account, the lawyer Zair Mundaray pointed out some considerations regarding the call made to González Urrutia.
1. The summons does not indicate the procedural quality as required by the doctrine of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
2. Edmundo Gonzalez does not pYou can know if you are a defendant or a witness.
3. They summon him for an interview. This is NOT possible in the case of defendants, since they only make a statement if they wish to do so, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
4. The citation must refer to some facts. In this confusing text there are no facts or dates that would help us to know what it refers to.
5. The summons is not to a prosecutor’s office, but to the 15th floor where Tarek William Saab’s office operates.
*Read also: The gaps in the TSJ ruling that validates Maduro’s victory
Post Views: 416
