Court Rejects Voluntary Appearance for Journalist Vito Quiles
Vito Quiles attempted to surrender voluntarily to the Juzgado de Instrucción número 32 of Madrid this week following reports of an active arrest warrant. Represented by defense attorney Juan Gonzalo Ospina, the team sought to address the warrant after discovering its existence through media reports rather than formal judicial notification.
Defense Blocked at Plaza de Castilla
Attorney Juan Gonzalo Ospina and lawyer Beatriz Uriarte arrived at the Madrid courts at Plaza de Castilla to formalize the appearance. Their primary goal was to have the arrest warrant set aside, citing a total lack of formal notification regarding the proceedings.
The court, however, refused. According to statements provided by Ospina to outlets including LaSexta, the defense was warned that if Quiles physically entered the courthouse, he would be taken into custody. Ospina returned to the judicial office three times, only to be told that the presiding judge had issued explicit instructions to alert the Judicial Police for an immediate arrest should Quiles arrive.
Questioning the Necessity of Arrest
The underlying case involves an allegation of slander, a charge typically punishable by a fine. Ospina has publicly questioned why an arrest warrant was issued for such a matter, suggesting the refusal to accept a voluntary appearance is irregular and contradicts the spirit of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal.
The defense argues that an individual under investigation maintains the right to present themselves to the court while assisted by counsel. They contend that this process would allow the judge to properly evaluate the necessity of maintaining a search and arrest order.
A Standstill in Madrid
The situation remains unresolved. The defense team is currently evaluating potential legal actions regarding the court’s handling of the attempted appearance. Meanwhile, the Juzgado de Instrucción número 32 has not issued a public statement regarding its procedural decisions or the claims made by the defense.
Legal representatives maintain that their client remains available to cooperate with the justice system. No further procedural updates have been confirmed by the judicial authorities.
Related reading