![[Img #74362]](https://thelatestnews.world/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/A-new-biomarker-of-Parkinsons-disease-progression-150x150.jpg)
The National Court has ordered the investigating judge of the ‘Soule case’, in which the alleged irregularities in the management of Ángel María Villar as president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) are investigated to cite the former president as defendants of the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA) Victoriano Sánchez Arminio and the general secretary of the RFEF Raúl Massó for the alleged diversion of funds of almost eight million euros. It also orders Villar to take a statement again as an investigated person, reports Europa Press.
The millionaire payments of FC Barcelona to the ‘number two’ of arbitration: Negreira’s great goal
Further
In an order, the magistrates of the Second Section of the Criminal Chamber partially uphold the appeal filed by the National Professional Soccer League that appealed the order of the investigating judge Alejandro Abascal in which he agreed to extend the investigation for three months and rejected the request to summon Sánchez Arminio and Massó as investigated, among other reasons, because they had already testified as witnesses. The court dismissed the other request from the League to have the RFEF investigated. The Chamber explains that this procedure must be studied pending the result of the statements of the three previous ones.
The resolution indicates that it is appropriate to take a statement as investigated, without prejudice to the future precision regarding the existence of evidence, since what is convenient at this time is to verify if there are indications of possible criminal responsibility and if these indications are attributable to the persons whose statement requests the League.
For the Chamber, the fact that they have previously testified as witnesses is not an obstacle to their subsequent change of condition, starting to be investigated. “It is only the existence or not of rational and sufficient evidence of criminality that has to determine whether or not the request for the incorporation of the persons cited as being investigated should be addressed.”
