ID:94177
    Date:2007-01-26 13:51:00
    Origin:07MADRID141
    Source:Embassy Madrid
    Classification:CONFIDENTIAL
    Dunno:05MADRID4308 06MADRID3013 07MADRID101 07MADRID141 07MADRID26 07MADRID82
    Destination:VZCZCXRO9639
PP RUEHAG RUEHROV
DE RUEHMD #0141/01 0261351
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 261351Z JAN 07
FM AMEMBASSY MADRID
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1709
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHGB/AMEMBASSY BAGHDAD PRIORITY 0133
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCAACC/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY
RUCNFB/FBI WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC PRIORITY
    
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 MADRID 000141 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/24/2017 
TAGS: PREL, MARR, SP 
SUBJECT: SPAIN/COUSO CASE: AMBASSADOR MEET WITH ATTORNEY 
GENERAL 
 
REF: A. MADRID 101 
     B. MADRID 82 
     C. MADRID 26 
     D. 2006 MADRID 3013 
     E. 2005 MADRID 4308 
 
Classified By: DCM Hugo Llorens; reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) 
 
1. (C) Summary.  The Ambassador and DCM met with Spanish 
Attorney General Candido Conde Pumpido on January 25 to 
review the USG's concerns with the direction of the Jose 
Couso case and to inquire how the Spanish Government plans to 
respond to recent judicial developments (REFS A, B, C, D). 
The Ambassador underscored that the primary motivation of his 
inquiry was to protect the rights of the three U.S. 
servicemen named in the Couso case, since the matter had 
already been properly investigated by the USG.  Among other 
issues, the Ambassador raised a January 22 fax from the 
magistrate handling the Couso case to the Embassy's Consular 
Section requesting the Embassy's assistance in obtaining 
"complete identifying" information regarding the three U.S. 
servicemen named in the case.  The magistrate's fax, which 
did not come in the required format for a Mutual Legal 
Assistance (MLAT) request, was leaked by "judicial sources" 
just hours after it was sent to the Embassy.  Press coverage 
indicates the magistrate's request was intended to help him 
win Interpol's agreement to publish the Spanish international 
detention order.  The Ambassador told Conde Pumpido that the 
Embassy did not intend to respond to the magistrate's fax. 
 
2. (C) Attorney General Conde Pumpido (strictly protect) 
emphasized that while there was nothing the Spanish 
Government could do to control the actions of the judiciary, 
the National Court prosecutors would continue to oppose the 
detention orders against the three U.S. servicemen, as well 
as any effort to embargo USG assets in connection with the 
case (REF B).  Conde Pumpido warned that he expected the 
magistrate to continue to issue requests to the USG and to 
seek media coverage of his efforts, but said he expected the 
case to "go nowhere."  He said he understood that the USG did 
not intend to respond to Spanish judicial requests with 
additional information, but suggested that even a perfunctory 
reply would undermine the magistrate's contention that the 
USG had been unresponsive to his requests.  Conde Pumpido 
confirmed that the magistrate could not independently issue a 
bilateral request to the USG for the extradition of the three 
U.S. servicemen, since such a request would have to be 
approved by the Spanish Government.  Separately, Legal 
Attache Madrid has learned of reluctance at Interpol to 
publish the Spanish detention order (Red Notice) for the U.S. 
servicemen named in the Couso case, based on Interpol 
provisions barring involvement in activities of a "political, 
military, religious, or racial character."  Our sense is that 
there is still far to go in this matter and that the Spanish 
Government will search for a way to quietly terminate the 
case on technical grounds, while hoping to avoid a direct 
confrontation with the Couso family.  End Summary. 
 
//MAGISTRATE WORKING THE MEDIA// 
 
3. (SBU) On the morning of January 22, the Locally Employed 
Legal Adviser in the Consular Section received a fax from 
National Court Examining Magistrate Santiago Pedraz 
requesting the Embassy's assistance in obtaining identifying 
data for the three servicemen named in the Couso case (a copy 
of this document was e-mailed to L and EUR/WE).  It did not 
come through the official channels for an MLAT request and 
did not make clear precisely what information was being 
requested.  Mission personnel opted not to respond to the 
fax, nor seek clarification from Judge Pedraz or request that 
he send his request through appropriate channels.  Later on 
January 22, a press article in the wire service "Europa 
Press" citing judicial sources reported that Judge Pedraz had 
sent this request to the Embassy in order to help him meet an 
Interpol requirement that he provide "complete identifying 
data" for the accused in order for his Red Notice requests to 
be published by Interpol.  Post's analysis is that Judge 
Pedraz sent this request without the expectation of a USG 
response, but with the intention of demonstrating in the 
media that he was acting expeditiously in this case. 
 
4. (SBU) An unofficial translation of Judge Pedraz's fax 
follows: 
 
MADRID 00000141  002 OF 003 
 
 
 
BEGIN TEXT 
 
Prior Correspondence 99/2003-10 
 
To: Maria Angeles Sebastian, Legal Advisor to the Embassy of 
the United States of America in Spain 
 
This Court is undertaking judicial actions to investigate the 
circumstances and suspects in the death of Spanish journalist 
Jose Couso Permuy on 8 April 2003 in Baghdad, (and) as part 
of this investigation it has been decided to send you this 
note in order to obtain through your channels the complete 
identification of the following U.S. servicemen: 
 
- Sergeant THOMAS GIBSON, member of Company "A" of the 64th 
Armored Regiment, Third Armored Infantry Division of the 
United States Army; 
 
- Captain PHILIP WOLFORD, in command of Company "A" Armored 
Unit of the 64th Armored Regiment, Third Armored Infranty 
Division of the United States Army; 
 
- Lt. Colonel PHILIP DE CAMP, in command of the 64th Armored 
Regiment, Third Armored Infantry Division of the United 
States Army. 
 
Madrid, Monday 22 January, 2007 
 
Magistrate Santiago Pedraz Gomez 
 
END TEXT. 
 
//MEETING WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL// 
 
5. (C) Attorney General Conde Pumpido accepted the 
Ambassador's invitation to meet informally on January 25 to 
discuss a range of bilateral issues.  The Ambassador thanked 
Conde Pumpido for his visit in late 2005 (REF E) to suggest 
an approach that would allow the National Court to dismiss 
the case.  He noted that it had been difficult for the USG to 
comply with the suggestion but that we respected Conde 
Pumpido's advice and were pleased by the dismissal of the 
case by the National Court.  Now that the case had been 
remanded by the Spanish Supreme Court, the Ambassador said 
that he wanted to learn from Conde Pumpido the full range of 
possible outcomes in this case, with the understanding that 
the USG's primary motivation was the protection of the three 
U.S. servicemen unjustly accused of murder and war crimes. 
The Ambassador said that the USG report on the incident, 
which had been shared with the Spanish Government as early as 
August 2003, demonstrated that a thorough investigation had 
been undertaken by the USG and that the matter was closed. 
He said that the USG was also puzzled by Judge Pedraz's fax 
to the Consular Section and by its immediate release to the 
media, which suggested that Judge Pedraz did not intend to 
deal seriously with this sensitive case.  The Ambassador said 
that the Embassy did not intend to respond to Judge Pedraz's 
fax, nor did we seek for his request to be reissued through 
proper MLAT channels. 
 
6. (C) Conde Pumpido emphasized that the Spanish judiciary 
was entirely independent and that the decision by the Supreme 
Court and the actions of Judge Pedraz were beyond the ability 
of the Spanish Government to control.  The prosecutors now 
had no choice but to deal with the case.  However, he said 
that the National Court prosecutors remained convinced that 
Spain did not have jurisdiction to try this case and that the 
elements of the case should not lead to a trial.  He 
expressed the conviction that the case "would go nowhere." 
Conde Pumpido drew attention to the request by Judge Pedraz 
to the National Court prosecutors to examine the possibility 
of placing an embargo (freeze) on USG assets as part of any 
civil component to the Couso case.  He said the prosecutors 
would oppose any such request to embargo USG assets. 
(COMMENT: This implies that the prosecutors would appeal 
Judge Pedraz's motions to the appellate section of the 
National Court, which is the body that dismissed the Couso 
case in March 2005.  END COMMENT).  With regard to the 
unusual fax from Judge Pedraz, Conde Pumpido said that it was 
his understanding that it was related to Pedraz's efforts to 
comply with Interpol's technical requirements- ut said h 
did nnt thifk0tHa4 the Nthonal Coert 0rosecutors were even 
 
MADRID 00000141  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
aware of the fax. 
 
7. (C) Conde Pumpido cautioned that his experience with Judge 
Pedraz led him to believe that the magistrate would continue 
to issue judicial requests and demands to the Embassy, and 
that he would probably continue dealing with the press. 
Conde Pumpido reiterated that there was nothing the 
Government could do to rein in Pedraz.  He suggested that it 
might be advisable for the Embassy to transmit a perfunctory 
response to undermine the magistrate's contention that the 
USG was being unresponsive to Spanish judicial requests. 
Asked whether Pedraz had the ability to directly issue a 
bilateral request to the USG for the extradition of the three 
U.S. servicemen, Conde Pumpido said that Pedraz could not do 
so because any such request would have to go through the 
Government (COMMENT: Conde Pumpido did not guarantee that the 
Spanish Government would deny an extradition request, so we 
will remain attentive to this possibility.  END COMMENT). 
 
//RELUCTANCE BY INTERPOL TO ISSUE DETENTION NOTICE// 
 
8. (C) Separately, Legat Madrid learned through informal 
inquiries that there is great reluctance at Interpol to 
publish the Red Notices for the three U.S. servicemen, as 
requested by Judge Pedraz.  The Interpol contact said that 
the Secretary General was aware of the request and would do 
his best not to publish the request on the grounds that it 
would violate Article 3 of the Interpol Constitution and 
General Regulations, which states that "It is strictly 
forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention 
or activities of a political, military, religious, or racial 
character."  He indicated that if the requests were to go 
forward, Interpol would bring together the Spanish and U.S. 
representatives for consultations and that the matter would 
be voted upon by the Interpol Executive Committee, and then 
by the Interpol General Assembly.  (COMMENT: This information 
is reassuring, but we remain concerned that Judge Pedraz 
could frame his request in a manner that makes it more 
difficult for Interpol to reject, or that he could simply go 
around Interpol and distribute the detention orders 
internationally on his own.  END COMMENT). 
 
//COMMENT// 
 
9. (C) This appears to be the start of a lengthy process, and 
one that will be increasingly politically sensitive for the 
Zapatero Government.  Spanish judicial officials do not/not 
believe this case will prosper based on the available 
evidence and they not want this case to obstruct increasing 
cooperation between USG and Spanish judicial officials. 
However, it is clear from discussions with both the Attorney 
General and the Chief Prosecutor of the National Court that 
the prosecutors not entirely certain how to proceed not that 
Spanish jurisdiction has been established by Spain's Supreme 
Court.  Our sense is that they will continue to seek 
procedural/technical grounds for getting the case dismissed, 
without having to directly and publicly challenge the Couso 
family (which has already accused prosecutors of working to 
defend USG interests).  Our objective remains the dismissal 
of this case so that the three U.S. defendants will no longer 
face prosecution for a matter that has already been 
investigated and brought to a conclusion by the USG. 
Aguirre