Judge Denies Carlos Mazón Formal Entry into DANA Investigation, Reaffirms Witness Status
In a significant procedural setback for the former President of the Generalitat Valenciana, the judge overseeing the investigation into the management of the DANA catastrophe has denied Carlos Mazón’s request to become a formal party to the legal proceedings.
The ruling, issued by the investigating judge in Catarroja, maintains Mazón’s current status as a witness. The court emphasized that as long as he remains in this capacity, he is legally barred from having full access to the case files, a decision that marks a critical juncture in the ongoing judicial scrutiny of the regional government’s response to the extreme weather event.
The decision comes as the investigation intensifies, seeking to clarify the decision-making processes that occurred during the onset of the devastating floods. The judge’s refusal to grant Mazón “party” status effectively limits his ability to intervene directly in the proceedings or access certain sensitive documents that are currently reserved for those directly implicated or acting as prosecutors.
The “Anticipatory Access” Conflict
The judge’s order, made public this Friday, dismisses a motion for review filed by Mazón’s legal team. The defense had sought the designation of “particulares”—a mechanism to incorporate specific documents into the record—to gain broader insight into the case. However, the court ruled that granting such a request would constitute “anticipatory access” to the investigation.
According to the court order, allowing Mazón to access the case files through this method would contradict the judicial determination that he is not a formal party to the case. The judge noted that his procedural position has remained unchanged since his status as a witness was initially established.
“In short, the obtaining of particulars cannot be admitted for someone who is not a party, and even less so in an anticipatory manner,” the judge stated in the ruling, explicitly denying that the decision leaves the former president in a state of legal defenselessness.
The court further clarified that admitting such access would be fundamentally inconsistent with the current denial of his request to appear as a formal party in the proceedings.
Legal Recourse and the Three-Fold Offer
The judge addressed the defense’s claims regarding limited access by reminding the former president that he has already been provided with opportunities to review the proceedings under specific legal frameworks. Specifically, the court noted that Mazón had the opportunity to access the procedure in accordance with Article 118 bis of the Criminal Procedure Law (Lecrim) on three separate occasions.
This mention of the “three occasions” serves as a legal rebuttal to any argument that the investigation is being conducted in opacity. By citing the specific application of Art. 118 bis Lecrim, the judge is signaling that the court has met its transparency obligations toward the witness, even if those obligations do not extend to the level of a formal party.
The Public Prosecutor (Ministerio Fiscal) has signaled its support for the judge’s actions, backing the measures taken regarding Mazón’s status. The prosecutor’s alignment with the court suggests a unified judicial front in maintaining the distinction between those being investigated and those providing testimony.
Despite this, the legal battle is far from over. Mazón’s defense has filed an appeal, which will now be handled by the Second Section of the Audiencia de Valencia. This higher court will ultimately decide whether the former president can be granted the formal standing he seeks.
Conditional Cooperation: The WhatsApp and Call Data Dispute
The tension between the defense and the court has led to a standoff regarding digital evidence. Mazón has indicated that the delivery of his call logs and WhatsApp communications to the judge is being conditioned upon the resolution of his legal appeal.
This move places the investigation in a delicate position. While the court seeks to gather all relevant communications to reconstruct the timeline of the DANA response, the former president is leveraging his digital footprint as a tool in his broader legal strategy to change his status from witness to party.
Summary of Current Legal Status
| Entity / Individual | Current Legal Status | Role in DANA Investigation |
|---|---|---|
| Carlos Mazón | Witness (Testigo) | Providing testimony on government management |
| Ministerio Fiscal | Party (Parte) | Directing and overseeing the prosecution |
| Amparo Folgado | Witness (Citada) | Scheduled for testimony on May 25 |
| Audiencia de Valencia | Appellate Body | Reviewing the appeal for party status |
Shifts in Witness Testimony Schedule
While the focus remains heavily on the former president, the High Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunitat Valenciana) has also announced changes to the broader testimony schedule.
The scheduled testimony of the director of a day center in Picanya, originally set for May 25, has been suspended. In its place, the court has summoned Amparo Folgado, the Mayor of Torrent (PP), to appear on that same date. These adjustments reflect the fluid and evolving nature of the investigation as prosecutors and judges prioritize different avenues of inquiry.
The involvement of local leaders like Folgado underscores the wide-reaching scope of the investigation, which is moving beyond the central regional government to examine how local municipalities managed the crisis in the immediate aftermath of the flooding.
Disclaimer: This report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
The next major checkpoint in this legal saga will be the resolution of the appeal by the Audiencia de Valencia. The outcome of that ruling will determine whether Carlos Mazón remains a witness or gains the legal standing to actively participate in the defense of his administration’s actions.
We invite you to share your thoughts on this developing story. What are your views on the judicial handling of the DANA investigation? Leave a comment below and share this article with your network.
