The magistrate made this decision following a ruling by the Second Section of the Valencia Court of Appeal, which upheld Mazón's appeal and admitted his involvement in the proceedings, citing articles 118 and 118 bis of the Law of Criminal Procedure.

The judge considers that this involvement and the aforementioned articles grant the former head of the Consell a series of rights "incompatible" with his previously agreed-upon witness testimony. The judge points out that a witness is obliged to tell the truth, "under penalty of committing perjury," and would not be able to exercise rights such as not testifying or not answering certain questions.

It is added that the catalogue of rights in article 118 of the Lecrim includes "the right to remain silent, not to testify if one does not wish to, not to answer any or some of the questions put to him, not to testify against himself, and not to confess guilt".

Section 1, letter a, includes the right to be informed of the facts attributed to him, as well as any relevant changes in the object of the investigation. "All of this implies the need to revoke the witness testimony" of Mazón, the judge adds.

The magistrate includes in her resolution the ruling from the Provincial Court, which states that despite the decision of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV) that dismissed his reasoned exposition (in which he requested the president's imputation), "the investigation continues" and that this decision "does not constitute a dismissal" of the case regarding Mazón. His involvement is granted so that he "is not deprived of knowledge of the investigative evidence that concerns him," evidence that "could have – depending on the outcome of some of the ordered proceedings – future inculpatory significance".

Furthermore, it includes another point from the Court's ruling which suggests that "it appears that said activity is carried out, among other purposes, to ascertain" what Mazón, as president of the Valencian Generalitat, "did or could order on October 29, 2024." It is added that it cannot be ruled out that these investigations "could allow for the attribution of relevant activity in the investigated events," such as "his possible involvement in the decision to develop the ES-Alert message or in the delay of its production and sending, and the causal relationship that, in such a case, could exist in criminally relevant terms, with the deaths and injuries investigated".

The decision is not final and can be appealed within three days for a reform appeal, or five days for an appeal. Through an administrative order from the Clerk of the Court (LAJ), it is agreed to attach the Court's decision to the proceedings and to recognize Mazón's involvement in the procedure.