3º.- That Labor union, after the meeting held on April 7, He distributed a press release to the media that contained a version of what happened that was contrary to what had actually happened. That, in order to preserve the right to receive truthful information provided in the EC, the RFEF sent the press a press release correcting the differences and inaccuracies with the reality of what had happened at the meeting, accompanying, to the first medium that asked us for it, the recordings that accredited it.4º.- What it is difficult to speak of the right to privacy, which is repeatedly alluded to in the letter, when the AFE has sent a press release on the contents of the meeting, held in the presence of more than 20 people, so that in no case can the quality of secrecy be preached from it. What’s more, even yesterday, AFE sent the press the letter sent to the RFEF referring to the aforementioned meeting. In fact, it has been the habitual practice of that Union to send to the media, even before being received in this Federation, all the letters and writings that are sent to us, with a manifest desire to make known the content of the issues that concern us .We want once again to show that the RFEF has limited itself exclusively to clarifying before the public what really happened, with the corresponding documentary support of the recording. From the AFE brief, it is inferred that what is intended to be considered “secret” is not the meeting, but the real manifestations of their representatives in it, given its nature clearly contrary to the union interests of Spanish footballers.5º.- It must be remembered that, for criminal purposes, all data or information belonging to the company that you want to keep out of the reach of certain people must be understood as secret. The persistence contained in the brief that the statements of the representatives of AFE in the Commission must be classified as secret, leads us to the suspicion that AFE has a “hidden agenda”, which is why it intends to hide its own manifestations from its affiliates and from public opinion and that is why it tries to prevent its dissemination with alleged criminal actions. 6º.- Finally, AFE, how could it be otherwise, can exercise as many actions as it deems appropriate, signaling that the exercise of these will not prevent the RFEF from complying with its obligations in order to inform to public opinion on the veracity of what happened in matters that affect them. “ The Spanish Football Federation has remitted a letter to the Association of Spanish Footballers where you remember that Interveners at the meeting of the coronavirus crisis monitoring committee were warned that it was being recorded. He also explains that not only representatives of the AFE, League and Federation participated in the telematic meeting. The letter is the response to AFE’s announcement of take legal action against the FEF for leaking the audio of the meeting.The letter acknowledges that audios were provided to prove that the version of what happened at the meeting corresponded to that offered by the FEF and accuses the AFE, and implicitly its president, of having defended a position “clearly contrary to the union interests of Spanish soccer players” and of having a “hidden agenda” for demanding that the deliberations be secret.The Federation note states the following“1º.- That the Commission, unlike what some have transmitted, it is not exclusively made up of AFE, LNFP and RFEF. On the contrary, as you are well aware, it is made up of representatives of the RFEF; President, Secretary General, representatives of different committees and departments, (President of the CTA referees, Medical Services, Futsal, F. Feminino, Amateur F, 2nd B and 3rd Division, Legal, Competitions, etc.), by representatives of the LNFP, the Union of Footballers AFE, the Union of Futsal Players AJFS, and the Union of Futsal Players AJFSF, clubs (Women’s Football and Futsal), without any of its members or participants acting in a private capacity or as legal advisers.2º.- That at the beginning of the first meeting, held on March 12, it was agreed, without opposition from any of the interveners, to record the conversations of the commission for the record.In any case, when the commission has met electronically, on the screens of each of the participants a red pilot appears at all times to inform that the recording is taking place of the entire meeting.