The office of the public prosecutor has asked the Supreme Court to submit the case against the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, and the provincial public prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguezprosecuted for an alleged crime of revelation of secrets by the leaks with regard to the case of Alberto González Amador considering that “There is no evidence” That the attorney general had access to the post in which the lawyer admitted two tax crimes.
Moreover, the public ministry declares that the investigating judge of the case, Ángel Hurtado, has derived important circumstances and other “without evidence substrate”, such as the Alleged orders from Moncloa To wear this filtration.
The Lieutenant Officer of Justice of the Supreme, María Ángeles Sánchez Conde follows the steps that García Ortiz himself has taken, who asked the archive of his case by the state files on 6 June.
“It was Ayuso’s surroundings that leaked information used in a political campaign,” the attorney general defended himself in a letter that was presented when the instruction almost ended after he was formally charged.
The appeal of the office of the public prosecutor
Sánchez Conde defends that the most important e -mail was already known in advance that the attorney general had it, so the decision of Hurtado appealed and asked for the archive of the cause and exemption from the two processed public prosecutors
He did this directly to the professional space, so that the possible assessment of the instructor himself jumps. The public prosecutor has chosen this route that is loaded directly against the magistrate and accused him of having accused Garcia Ortiz with “new” statements that were not made during the instructionJust like public prosecutors acting by instructions from Moncloa.
The ‘number two’ of the public prosecutor claims that “the magistrate himself acknowledges that prior to the alleged filtration of the post of 2 February 2024 by the attorney -general by the media the existence of an offer by González Amador to recognize the committee of two tax crimes.”
In this respect, he adds that the agents of the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Protector ‘have also explained that A number of people knew it” in advance Until the alleged filtration of the post by the attorney general, the existence of the offer of agreement by González Amador “.
In fact, he accuses Hurtado for a “Reductionist argument” To take the only “legal sources” to which the SER chain was referred to the reported of the aforementioned e -mail in the night of March 13, the office of the public prosecutor or the lawyer of González Amador, which he excluded on the basis of the witness of the Lawyer himself, could be Carlos Neira.
About the alleged instructions of Moncloa
It emphasizes that “in none of the multiple resolutions and procedural acts refers to the existence of the government’s presidents by the attorney general or that his action was affected by external indications.”
That is why such an imputation is introduced Ex Novo“And” without any evidence “, which means” clear helplessness of those who investigated “, because they were asked or informed at any time during the procedure, nor any evidence to prove or distort such an extreme.
This means that she proclaims the “sounding absence of evidence about the remission of the post of the attorney -general office.”
