The Civil Guard report that has triggered the dismissal of Colonel Diego Pérez de los Cobos, where the Government is accused of authorizing the 8-M demonstration in Madrid, knowing the risk involved, omits relevant information, includes non-existent textual quotes, He confuses dates in relation to key decisions, offers wrong contagion data, and echoes numerous false news. The decision to overthrow Pérez de los Cobos turns that report into a political device and provoked harsh criticism from the opposition to Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska on Tuesday.
The report, the result of two months of investigation and the handling of enormous documentation, fabricates a general accusation against the Government Delegate in Madrid, the socialist José Manuel Franco, for authorizing the demonstration on March 8, knowing that he was putting himself in health risk of the 120,000 participants. The judge who is investigating this case has cited Franco on June 5 as a defendant for an alleged violation of omission.
The authors of the document did not contrast with the authorities of the Ministry of Health, from whom Judge Carmen Rodríguez-Medel also requests documentation, many of the information that stands out to support her thesis on the guilt of government authorities for having authorized a very dangerous concentration for the health of the Spanish. The document, sent by the Madrid Command to the Rodríguez-Medel court as part of the investigation into the protests held during the expansion of the coronavirus, consists of 83 pages where agents analyze 177 concentrations called in the region between 5 and March 14. The researchers conclude that “as of March 5, 2020, no demonstration should have taken place” due to the health crisis.
The main arguments of the report are as follows:
I treat 130 protests differently. To argue that the Government Delegation in Madrid knew the health risks of the coronavirus epidemic since March 5, the Civil Guard report indicates that of the 130 authorized protests on those dates – from March 5 to 14— 35 were called off, of which 12 were at the request of the Government Delegation for health reasons, according to the Civil Guard. The conveners in nine of those 12 cases, contacted by this newspaper, deny that version. Diana Chnaiker, one of the convenors of an act of protest in front of the Madrid Assembly on March 12, tells EL PAÍS: “No one pressured me. We canceled the event on our own because we believed it was ridiculous to demonstrate in front of an empty building. ” The Civil Guard report tries to point out that the Government Delegation was aware of the health risk and that is why it canceled 12 demonstrations by telephone without recording these calls in writing. The report does not highlight that these concentrations were canceled after March 9, when the Ministry of Health had already taken isolation measures in three regions – Madrid, La Rioja and the Basque Country -, discouraging the events with a high number of people.
Evangelists Congress suspended. In the conclusions, the report cites a document signed by Pilar Aparicio, director of Health, on March 6. It highlighted “the risk in mass events of any kind”, according to the Civil Guard. But the quote omits the fundamental: it talks about the risks in massive events of any kind “with a high percentage of presence of people from” countries at risk. Something that the author of the text of the Civil Guard makes disappear. The report highlights that Health suspended on March 6 an evangelical congress scheduled in the Caja Mágica for two weeks later because the ministry knew that there was a risk in any act that gathered a crowd, such as the 8-M demonstration, which however was authorized.
Those responsible for Health, who were not consulted by the Civil Guard, explain that it was a worldwide event in a closed area for which a large influx of people from other countries was expected and, therefore, incorporated the element of risk that was not They had other events called in Madrid, such as the 8-M demonstration. That is omitted with the mutilated quote. In addition, by that date an infectious focus had already been detected in an evangelist center, which represented an extra risk to discourage the holding of the congress. Dr. Fernando Simón justified the celebration of the 8-M demonstration because it was a “national call” to which citizens of risk countries would not attend.
The European report warning of risk. The European Center for Disease Control developed an action protocol on March 3 for different risk scenarios. The Civil Guard report cites this document to emphasize that the Spanish authorities knew that the European body recommended not to hold mass gatherings due to the high risk of contagion. However, the report omits an important part of the European protocol, which recommended “the cancellation of massive concentrations in countries that were in scenarios 3 and 4”. Spain, on March 8, was still in scenario 1, with very few infections and without information about the existence of community transmission in its territory, something that the Civil Guard report does not cite.
The omissions of the WHO and the Community of Madrid. The report also makes no reference to the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) in relation to countries that detect “community transmission” (when infections occur between people with no links to trips to risk areas). On March 9, the WHO noted for the first time that countries where there was community transmission “could consider closing schools, canceling concentrations, and other measures to reduce exposure.” That same day, the General Directorate of Health of Madrid issued a report indicating that the existence of community transmission had been confirmed and it was advisable to take measures of social isolation. And on the same day, Health also brought together the Inter-territorial Health Council to adopt containment measures in Madrid, La Rioja and the Basque Country.
None of this is related in the document, which, however, concludes that the Government Delegation was aware of the serious health situation due to “reports, documentation and public or official information from organizations and authorities.” But before March 8, there were no official reports recommending the adoption of preventive measures, except in places where infectious foci had been detected or in events to which citizens of other countries could attend where there was community transmission of the virus.
The quote from Dr. Simon that never was. Citing a medical publication, the report maintains that on February 28, Dr. Simón stated in his daily appearance that in Spain there was community transmission of the virus and that, in this scenario, the virus could not be contained by controlling infected people because who they were was not known. With that statement, the recklessness of Dr. Simon, seeing no impediment to the celebration of 8-M, would have been insurmountable. The reality is that that day the high position of Health said exactly the opposite: that there was still no community transmission and therefore it was not advisable to take restrictive measures.
Information about the coronavirus
– Here you can follow the last hour on the evolution of the pandemic
– This is how the coronavirus curve evolves in Spain and in each autonomy
– Search engine: The de-escalation by municipalities
– Questions and answers about coronavirus
– Guide to action against the disease
– Click here to subscribe to the daily newsletter on the pandemic
–
In EL PAÍS, dozens of journalists work to bring you the most rigorous information and fulfill your public service mission. If you want to support our journalism and enjoy unlimited access, you can do it here for € 1 the first month and € 10 the following month, with no commitment to stay.
Subscribe-
