At the ANCCE (National PRE Breeders’ Association of Spain) Executive Committee meeting held in the city of Sevilla on Friday, the 12th of February, the following decisions were unanimously agreed upon:

1.  An agreement was reached about the accusations presented against Mr. Alfonso del Castillo: To decide about the accusation that was presented against Mr. Alfonso del Castillo Caracuel, by the members Mr. Pedro Pingarrón Santofimia and Mr. José Emilio Corral del Olmo. The full text of the aforementioned resolution is included as APPENDIX Nº 1.

2. Composition of the Follow-up and Control Commission for Conformation Competitions: from now on, this Commission will be made up of three breeder (Full) members, who may request as many technical reports as they consider necessary for the correct and smooth operation of the said competition.

3. Draw for the judges of Conformation Competitions: Following the meeting held with the Conformation Competition Organizing Committees, and having passed on their conclusions to the Committee, the Board have agreed to continue with the draw system for judges performed before a notary for all the competitions held in the 2010 season, including SICAB, in accordance with the category of the judges and competitions. This decision was reached based on the considerations that can be found in the document included herein as APPENDIX Nº 2.

APPENDIX Nº 1

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION WITH REGARDS TO THE ACCUSATION PRESENTED AGAINST MR. ALFONSO DEL CASTILLO CARACUEL

The ANCCE Executive Committee, at the meeting held in Sevilla on the 12th of February 2010, and with regards to the accusation presented by breeders, Mr. Pedro Pingarrón Santofimia and Mr. José Emilio Corral del Olmo against the Conformation Competition Follow-up and Control Commission consultant judge, Mr. Alfonso del Castillo Caracuel, this present RESOLUTION has been taken

BASED ON THE FACTS:
1.  Mr. Alfonso del Castillo Caracuel has performed the task of Consultant for the ANCCE Conformation Competition Follow-up and Control Commission during the 2009 season, by virtue of an agreement by the ANCCE Executive Committee.

2. Mr. Pingarrón presented a formal accusation of improper actions on the part of Mr. Alfonso del Castillo Caracuel, by sending a certified fax sent to the ANCCE offices on the 19th of December, 2009, in which he states that on the afternoon of the 29th of November 2009, his wife and co-owner of the Mater Christi stud farm, Mrs. Macarena Martin San Pedro, and Mr. del Castillo, had a private conversation in which several statements were made, the most outstanding include:

a) At SICAB, in the opinion of Mr. del Castillo, their Stud Farm was judged according to their desires.

b) Mr. del Castillo had accused Mr. José Emilio Corral del Olmo of having bought one of the judges who had judged at the last edition of SICAB.
In his accusation, Mr. Pingarrón also states “the power that Mr. del Castillo exercises over all the judges in general….., as well as, more specifically, as is common knowledge within the sector, the relationship of friendship with those who were his most faithful students, Mr. Juan Carnero and Mr. Manuel Serna Borja, both of whom were judges at SICAB 2009”.
He requested that disciplinary actions be taken against Mr. Alfonso del Castillo, that he be temporarily suspended from his duties and that actions be launched to proceed to his permanent suspension as a judge.

3. Mr. José Emilio Corral supports this accusation in full by means of a certified fax received by ANCCE on the 10th of January, 2010. He also requested the permanent suspension of the said judge, making the ANCCE Executive Committee jointly and severally responsible for the statements supposedly made by Mr. del Castillo, announcing that he reserve the right to exercise legal actions against both parties.

4. ANCCE demanded proof of these events, to back the aforementioned accusation, in a certified fax sent to Mr. Pingarrón on the 29th of December, 2009.

5. On the 7th of January 2010, Mr. Pedro Pingarrón presented ANCCE with a CD of the supposedly private conversation between Mr. Alfonso del Castillo and Mrs. Macarena Martin Sampedro.

6. On the 8th of January, and having understood that Mr. del Castillo had been designated by the organization as the only judge of the First Central American Championships, to be held in Managua from the 14th to 18th of January 2010, Mr. Pedro Pingarrón requested temporary suspension of the said judge by the ANCCE Committee.

7. At the ANCCE Executive Committee meeting held in Sevilla on the 22nd of January 2010, it was agreed to notify Mr. Alfonso del Castillo of the accusations presented, giving him ten (10) days, from the receipt of the accusations to respond to the allegation. Likewise, it was decided to temporarily suspend Mr. del Castillo from his duties as the Conformation Competition Follow-up and Control Commission Consultant, until such time as this situation is resolved by the Executive Committee. In no case would this temporary suspension affect his condition as Conformation Competition Judge. This agreement was ratified in full by the Board of Directors at the meeting held that same day.

8.  On the 10th February, in due time and manner, Mr. del Castillo presented his allegations in a written statement, denying the essential content of the accusations made against him, stating that the recording had been manipulated and taken out of the real context of the conversation held, using only a part of the conversation, which the interested parties considered as the most appropriate to back-up their accusations. That at no time did he accuse anyone of buying anyone and that when he was questioned, to make him admit the guilt of someone, he said “No, no, I have not accused anyone, because I cannot prove it…...”

In his written statement, he also informed about the possibility of taking criminal actions against those who had formulated the accusation, for slander or insults, which he assures that he has not made, as well as for the recording and dissemination of a private conversation, taking it out of context, which, in his opinion, is contrary to the current legislation.

FUNDAMENTAL POINTS OF LAW:

1. The contracting of Mr. Alfonso del Castillo as a Consultant for the Follow-up and Control Commission by the Executive Committee, falls within the area of competitions as laid out in article 46, and those following, of the ANCCE Rules and Regulations. 

2. The Executive Committee lacks the jurisdiction or the competence to determine whether the recording of the supposed conversation is legal or not, and much less to determine, should it be declared legal by the corresponding authority, whether or not the plaintiff is guilty of insults or slander as is laid out in the laws of Spain. The Committee cannot accept the aforementioned recording as proof until such a time as its legality has been confirmed, without prejudice that it is a court of law that must determine whether a crime has been committed, by means of a conviction. Only then and after that can this committee respond to the possible consequences that, within the scope of ANCCE, that sentence may have. Also, the basic principle of presumption of innocence must be taken into consideration at all times. 

3. Nevertheless, this Committee considers that the facts arising from this controversy harm ANCCE and that, independent of the questions to be legally resolved as would be the case, the said Association must act and take a decision regarding the continuity of Mr. del Castillo in the performance of his duties and, therefore, with regards to his selection and recommendation as a consultant for the Conformation Competition Follow-up and Control Commission

BASED ON THESE FACTS, THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESOLVES:
1. To remove Mr. Alfonso del Castillo Caracuel from his position as Consultant for the Conformation Competition Follow-up and Control Commission, Commission that, according to agreement adopted at the same Committee Session.

2. Avoid making any decision regarding the other requests formulated, until this Committee has been duly notified by the corresponding sentence rendered by a court of law, as would be the case, with respect to both the recording and the accusations presented.
And to thus confirm, the present document is signed in Sevilla on the 12th of February, 2010

APPENDIX Nº 2

REASONS THAT HAVE LED TO THE ANCCE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DECISION TO PROCEED TO A DRAW FOR THE JUDGES IN COMPETITIONS, DEPENDING ON THE CATEGORY OF BOTH

1. Clarification of the legal framework:
- ANCCE is responsible for designing the legal framework that must govern the Spanish National Championships for PRE Stallions and Mares every year, and it not only has the obligation, but also the responsibility for clarifying this and taking all possible measures to ensure that this is a fair, democratic championships, without pressure or coercion, no matter where these may arise.

- It is true that the ANCCE general assembly is the sovereign organ of the association; the executive committee and the Board are authorized to take those measures they deem necessary for the correct and smooth running of the association, with all their decisions being ratified by the assembly. All this is deduced from the indications laid out in article 49 of the Association Rules and Regulations.

- The Rules and Regulations, for the already-expressed reasons, are a dynamic, as opposed to static, legal framework. This means that in virtue of the experiences throughout the year, the text of the said Rules and Regulations will be modified depending on the requirements and deficiencies observed from experience during the competitions themselves.

2. Legal Framework to be established:
- The Rules and Regulations approved by the assembly establish the division of judges and competitions into categories A, B and C, with the clear intention of awarding the judging of the competitions to the judges of the different categories depending on the category of the said competition.

- In legal comparisons, in dozens of competitive categories, including equestrian events, a draw for the judges is standard procedure, which is a practice that ANCCE has incorporated into its “modus operandi”.

- A draw before a notary is totally aseptic, as it avoids pressures of any type being brought to bear on the appointment of the judges.

- By establishing categories for the judges, it is necessary to give them equality of opportunities for the correct, continuous advancement of their professional performance as such. If the objectivity of the qualifications is added to the principle of equality of opportunities, the effect is obviously felt. More so if we bear in mind that a factor of evaluation is, and will be, the number of competitions judged throughout one year, which is something that is impossible to quantify if there is no equality of opportunities.

- It has already been stated that ANCCE has both the obligation and the responsibility to regulate all aspects related to the Spanish National Championships.  It is logical that anyone who does not want to respect those Rules and Regulations will automatically be excluded from the system. There is an annual calendar for all of the competition models, as well as an exact reference to those who have the responsibility of evaluating those events, whether these be judges, referees, etc. with a programmed annual calendar so that breeders are able to choose their individual competition calendar, and the judges will be perfectly informed of when they have to perform their professional duties.

3.  De facto situation:
- It is an unquestionable reality (in fact some organizing committees have recently expressed this in writing) that certain participating stud farms apply pressure for the appointment of specific judges, and depending on that appointment, under obvious pressure, decide whether or not their horses will finally compete or not in that competition. It is also true that some judges have offered better conditions in an effort to be chosen, and there has even been the case of judges who have called on the breeders to persuade them to name that judge.  ANCCE is aware of all these facts after organizing competitions for 30 years.

- These facts are totally unacceptable and are detrimental to the silent majority of breeders who should have the same rights and obligations as the rest.

4. Summary:
- ANCCE has taken the measures to enable the draw for judges based on the following criteria:

o Put an end to the pressures suffered by the organizing committees from any angle.

o Defend the principle of equality of rights and obligations of all breeders when it comes to entering a competition, while putting an end to the position of supremacy that certain stud farms could have.

o Principle of equality for judges, giving opportunities to all those who judge, and enabling them to be evaluated under equality of conditions.