Miguel Tejeiro arriving at the Palma court.

15-03-2016Cati Cladera

Miguel Tejeiro, the former tax advisor to and secretary of the Instituto Nóos, continued giving witness evidence in the Nóos trial yesterday. His testimony had been halted on Friday when a challenge was made that it would involve a breach of professional confidence.

Tejeiro, originally one of the accused but absolved when the union Manos Limpias dropped its case against him (he was not being prosecuted by the state), suggested that Princess Cristina had been reading from a "script" when she answered questions from her lawyer. Remarking on the princess's statement that she had total confidence in him, he said that they had only ever seen each other three times. "I don't know what was going on in her head."

He then went on to say that the princess had the "right to lie, but I have the duty to tell the truth" in saying that he couldn't explain where this confidence had come from in the princess justifying decisions in respect of Aizoon (the separate company co-owned by the princess and Iñaki Urdangarin). The princess had said that she had signed Aizoon minutes out of trust in her husband and his advisors, among whom was Tejeiro, despite, as the princess had noted, never having attended a meeting. "I don't know if what was said was in order to discredit me," said Tejeiro.

Considered a key prosecution witness, Tejeiro complained of continuing to feel threatened by defence lawyers taking action against him for breaching an obligation to professional secrecy. The president of the court was forced to reprimand Manuel González Peeters, the lawyer for Diego Torres, one of the two principal accused along with Urdangarin, for his "aggressive" manner towards the witness.

Tejeiro added that he had never received any orders from the princess and that he had also not detected any tax anomalies in respect of Aizoon. He said that he was unaware that Urdangarin's personal expenses had been loaded through Aizoon. In this, he was contradicting Urdangarin's evidence, as he has said they were. On funds that were sent abroad, Tejeiro maintained that it was Torres who was the one who was behind the network by which they were diverted overseas. It was a "dirty trick" to suggest that it was he (Tejeiro) who had done so.

Tejeiro and another witness, Carlos Masià, the notary who endorsed the creation of Aizoon, both said that the princess had any role in the management of the company.


To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and be logged in.

* Mandatory fields

Steve Riches / Hace over 5 years

What a waste of time and money when the accused is allowed to answer questions only from their own lawyer! Interesting too, according to the report above, the someone "has the right to lie"...no "...truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth" then. So, what's the point of it all other than to make life difficult for anyone who is accused?


Sean Dobson / Hace over 5 years

So obviously in a Spanish court one does not swear to ''tell the truth,the whole truth and nothing but the truth'' but ,given the numbers of former politicians,corrupt officials and others from all walks of life,that is hardly surprising. Compared to the intensive questioning they would receive in a British court,the accused and witnesses have been given an easy time of it. Not once has it been put to Christine or Inaki how their life styles and properties far exceed their income,why not.?