The judge asks France for permission to interrogate “Josu Ternera” for the T-4 attack

The judge of the National Court Francisco de Jorge has extended the investigation for the attack against the T-4 of Barajas in 2006 for six more months, until July 29, 2024, with the aim of interrogating the former ETA leaders accused after a Dignity and Justice complaint. In a document to which LA RAZÓN has had access, the instructor has agreed to issue a European investigation order to the French authorities to be able to interrogate José Antonio Urrutikoetxea, “Josu Ternera” as defendants (whose surrender to Spain for other reasons remains pending since more than four years ago) and Ainhoa ​​Ozaeta, “Kuraia”.

This case attempts to clarify the alleged responsibility of four former leaders of the terrorist group in the attack against T-4 in Barajas on December 30, 2006, in which Diego Armando Estacio and Carlos Alonso Palate were murdered and 68 people were injured. , and which blew up the truce announced by the criminal organization nine months earlier.

In addition to “Josu Ternera” and Ozaeta, the former “military” head of ETA Aitzol Iriondo is also being investigated – as this newspaper announced, the successor of “Txeroki” at the head of the “commandos” is summoned to testify on March 21 by videoconference from the San Sebastián prison – and Mikel Carrera Sarobe, “Ata”, recently convicted of the murder in 2001 of the president of the PP of Aragon Manuel Giménez Abad.

According to the head of the Investigative Court number 1 of the National Court, the extension of the investigation “is necessary and legally mandatory” to be able to take statements from these three former members of the Zuba or ETA steering committee. In the case of Aitzol Iriondo, De Jorge argues that it is not necessary to have permission from France (which has not authorized his surrender for this reason) given that the provisional detention of the former head of the “commandos” has not been agreed upon for this procedure. nor will he remember – he anticipates – his statement by videoconference in March. The instructor thus relies on the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in case C-388/08 (Leymann and Pustovarov), which allows not to request authorization from the country that authorized the delivery for different reasons as long as “no measure restricting freedom has been applied during the procedure.”

At the top of the terrorist gang

The police investigation places Aitzol Iriondo in charge of the “military apparatus” on the dates of the attack, while “Ata” was responsible for the “logistical apparatus”, “Josu Ternera” for the “political” area and “Kuraia” was in charge. of the “treasury apparatus”.

According to Judge Alejandro Abascal when admitting the Dignity and Justice complaint, the four former ETA leaders were “dominators of the terrorist organization ETA from their position as top leaders of the management body, the executive committee or Zuba” at the time of the attempt.

From that position, they were presumably in charge of “deciding, coordinating” and “selecting” the objectives, as well as “delivering the material necessary to attack and giving the express order to carry out the criminal action.”

For this attack, ETA members Mattin Sarasola, Igor Portu and Mikel San Sebastián were sentenced to more than a thousand years in prison. That ruling already accredited the “direct involvement” of the Zuba in the decision to attack the Barajas airport. It was the ETA leadership that also provided the “Elurra commando” with the van-bomb that the ETA detonated in the parking lot.

In its complaint, Dignity and Justice considered that “the political significance” of the attack made it “impossible” for the decision to commit it to be taken outside the Zuba. The association led by Daniel Portero complained that while criminal responsibility reaches the members of the “command” and the “intermediate links of transmission of the chain” (“Txeroki” and Joseba Aranibar), the same does not happen with “the first and top managers”, the members of the Zuba. “The final executors of the placement and detonation of the explosive would never have been able to adopt such a decision with such political and public implications for the gang outside of the Zuba,” stressed the then Dignidad y Justicia lawyer Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Arias.