The murderer is still free, that is the only thing we know clearly at the moment. In other words, the agent who killed the young man Iñigo Cabacas four years ago in Bilbao with a rubber ball is still in freedom. What we still don't know is whether it was a murder or a homicide. That has to be clarified by the trial.

Is the killer quiet? Will you be aware of what you have to do or will you be serious each time you see in the media the parents of Iñigo Manu Cababas and Fina Lizeranzu?

You can imagine the closest authorities that seek to generate tranquility between the ertzainas: “They are the ones who pass,” “It was an accident... at least that is sold by their leaders. Ertzaintza Director, Gervasio Gabilondo (Europa Press, April 2013): “It’s been an accident, I think we have to call it that, it’s been an accident because no one had the will to cause the pain that has occurred.”

However, that same month, the Gara newspaper published the order of the head of the Ertzaintza police station in Deusto, in which the ertzaina who participated in the aggression injured Cabacas. According to the interview, the officers of the Ertzainas who participated in the operation informed Ugarte three times that the situation was controlled at that time by Athletic’s hobby. He answered them firmly: “I will repeat the instructions to make them clear (…) Enter with everything we have in the alley, enter the People (…) And then the situation will be controlled.” The result is known: a rubber ball that broke the head of the young Iñigo Cabacas by taking something in the bar outside.

The Interior Minister of the Basque Government, Rodolfo Ares, promised that everything would be investigated and resolved in those days. He didn't say when, of course, he couldn't, because that's not in his hands, but it was in his hands to channel the research as forcefully as possible to know who the ertzaina that shot that ball was. During these four years, the parents of Cabacas have continuously denounced the obstacles that have hampered the investigation. It has even been a clarifier for a long time: a group of ertzainas – some with batons, others with ball shots – specific commands, facts and clear conclusions … Is it so hard to reach judgment? It seems that yes, but it is not exceptional, all the murders that have been committed by the police are proof of this.

The recordings were released one year after the Interior Department withdrew UGARTEKO and four other Ertzainas from their jobs. But the coin has its reverse: Jorge Aldekoa, chief commissioner of the Bilbao police station and who was in service since then, was appointed head of the Ertzaintza in 2014.

But it's not enough. UGARTEKO's police command has sued attorney Jone Goirizelaia, who brings the particular indictment on behalf of the family of Iñigo Cabacas, and the Gara newspaper. In his view, the use of such recordings and their name have been misused and disseminated, and he therefore claims compensation of EUR 777,000 for the lawyer and the newspaper. For the time being, the procedure remains in the hands of the judges.

The authorities of the Ertzaintza claim that following the charge that caused the death of Cabacas the Ertzaintza has not used the rubber ball again. However, the Basque Government has not yet decided to ban its use entirely. EH Bildu called in the Basque Parliament in 2015 for the express ban on the use of rubber balls, but he did not accept it; the other groups called for a total reduction in the use of balls and that was approved.

In the Government of Navarra, however, the government agreement prohibits the use of rubber balls, which will enter into force in 2017 after the delivery of this new material by the foral police. The Spanish National Police, for its part, takes over the ball launchers when it takes care of the demonstrations in Pamplona/Iruña.

Jone Goirizelaia reported last year on these dates that there is already enough material to identify the agent who fired the weapon, according to the investigation. But of course, he followed someone's instructions. The trial, which must be held before or after, is something else if justice is to be done. In view of the case's trajectory, the doubt has prevailed.