Doctor prosecuted for Osakidetza leaks denies leaking examination to daughter-in-law

The doctor accused of leaking questions from Osakidetza's 2016-2017 Public Employment Offer (OPE) exam to her daughter-in-law has denied leaking and claimed that her son's partner  — who is also being prosecuted — did not need her help. "She also had to give up that OPE because she suffered threatsfrom senior Basque Health Service officials , "she said.

The Territorial High Court of Álava held today, Wednesday, the second and final session of the trial 2nd, at which, before the indictments and defences presented their final reports, the two defendants gave their testimony.

The first to take the floor was the doctor accused of leaking questions from the exam to hisdaughter-in-law, who said that he had been preparing, along with others, the theoretical examination of plastic surgery. He points out that he was phoned  — he didn't give the name of the person who called him — explaining that they were "tight in time," and then asked him if he could help them prepare the exam questions.

According to the defendant, he accepted his request on the condition that he would only take half of the examination and the other half would be prepared by another person. He also claimed that he did so with the intention of "doing Osakidetza a favor."

He then explains that when he accepted that assignment , herefused to be a member of the Tribunal because he knew that his daughter-in-law would participate in that examination process.

The prosecution then asks him why he did not refuse to prepare part of the examination, to which the defendant replies that it is not the same to participate in the jury as to "prepare some questions." 

She has also denied that she informed her daughter-in-law of the examination questions and has assured her that she made only"a general recommendation" on the bibliography she could consult.

On the other hand, he explains that when the results of the examination became known, the head of HR in Osakidetza contacted him to ask his daughter-in-law to resign from the OPE because, he said, if any other candidate challenged him, the examination would have to be repeated, which would mean "a lot of work". That being so, and once he knew it, his daughter-in-law "departed" from the Public Offer of Employment, "whatever the reason."

In his testimony, he also made it clear that he was not surprised that the opponent had invented 44 of the 46 questions he had prepared.

According to the defendant, it was not uncommon for him to have a good score on the part of his exam, "because he specialised in it in a hospital outside the Basque Country."

He also points out that nine of the questions attributed to him by the charges were not prepared by him, but by the other doctor who participated in the design of the examination.

Her daughter-in-law says she was "horrified" by several senior officials.

The second defendant for the Osakidetza leak case, the doctor's daughter-in-law, also testified at today's hearing that she was "horrified" by senior health officials, which is why she decided to "stay away" from the review process and, in her words, "did anything" to her until she went to private health.

In this regard, he has made it clear that no one helped him in this examination, nor had any recommendation been made, for he has remarked that he did not even know that his father-in-law was preparing the examination.

During the hearing, the defendant reported that he had been asked to "depart" from the examination process and that he had been promised to continue working in Osakidetza, "even though in the end they did not comply".