The Special Independent Prosecutors Panel “lacks jurisdiction” to intervene in the Justice Department’s determination that two former La Fortaleza advisers did not commit crimes in relation to alleged pressure to ensure the awarding of contracts to insurance companies, Justice Secretary Antonio M. Sagardía said Tuesday.
“This investigation was not done according to the terms Law 2 of Feb. 23, 1988 … known as the Special Independent Prosecutors Panel Law, because no sworn testimony was received that constituted sufficient cause to determine that these officials committed felonies or misdemeanors,” the Justice chief wrote in a letter to SIP Panel President Berta Mainardi Peralta. “That is to say, the investigation never became a preliminary investigation according to the terms established in the SIP Panel law.”
The two advisers to Gov. Fortuño investigated by Justice were former Alejandro Figueroa, former secretary of Organization and Public Policy, and ex-Health Affairs adviser Diego Loinaz.
Prosecutors evaluated whether they violated the Penal Code, which prohibits illicit enrichment and undue intervention in government processes.
They concluded that Figueroa did not commit a crime by allegedly pressuring the Health Insurance Administration (ASES) to favor insurance provider Cosvi in the awarding of a contract provide services under the Health Reform in the southeast and northeast regions. The program manages some $1.5 billion annually in services for the poor throughout Puerto Rico.
When the allegations surfaced, Figueroa and Loinaz were relieved of their functions related to health, and later resigned after Justice opened its investigation.
Figueroa’s case was referred to the Government Ethics Office and the Solicitor General for investigations into whether he violated the legal ethics canon or the Government Ethics Law.
Loinaz was not referred.
In his letter to Mainardi Peralta, Sagardía said he “only has the obligation to notify the panel [of the] results of preliminary investigations when [the agency] receives sworn testimony that leads to the understanding that … [an official] committed a felony or misdemeanor.”
“That is, the secretary should report the results of an ... investigation when it concludes [whether] and SIP is recommended, not recommended, or there is sufficient evidence to carry out a [further] investigation or … not to,” he wrote. “In this case, [I] did not have [enough] proof to activate a preliminary investigation. Therefore, the panel did not acquire jurisdiction over the investigation.”