The Supreme Court's dilemma: whether or not to suspend the Attorney General

BarcelonaThe Supreme Court must decide whether to suspend the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, due to his indictment. This is being requested by the Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors (APIF), which is acting as private prosecutor in the case against García Ortiz and which filed a brief with the high court on Wednesday requesting his provisional suspension from office once his trial begins. This association considers the suspension "essential" to "guarantee the proper conduct of the proceedings."

The APIF argues that if García Ortiz remains Attorney General while he is being tried, "he would be the hierarchical superior of the prosecutor appointed to intervene," and believes that due to this hierarchical relationship, "he could issue orders," which would cause "an unacceptable distortion." According to the brief filed, the regulations stipulate that this decision should be made by the Public Prosecutor's Office. However, the same text indicates that this body "should abstain due to having a direct interest in the matter," and maintains that the Supreme Court is the one who should make the decision in this case. For the APIF, if the Supreme Court can adopt precautionary measures "as forceful" as pretrial detention or the seizure of "millions of euros," it would be "extremely paradoxical" if it could not provisionally suspend from work "an already accused official," the document states.

It is worth remembering that this association of prosecutors is calling for García Ortiz to be sentenced to six years in prison and 12 years of disqualification for malfeasance and disclosure of secrets. This is a minority and conservative association that a month ago, along with other associations, called for a strike against the reforms the Spanish government has promoted in the area of justice.

The APIF's request comes after the appeals court yesterday upheld the prosecution of the Attorney General for the crime of disclosure of secrets, supporting the decision of the investigating judge in the case, Ángel Hurtado, to investigate him. The decision was made with the support of two judges—Julián Sánchez Melgar and Eduardo de Porres—but a third judge, Andrés Palomo, issued a dissenting opinion, finding that a "solid basis of evidence" could not be established against García Ortiz to allow him to be prosecuted.

More calls for his resignation

Coinciding with the request from the private prosecution, the Association of Prosecutors (AF) has also called for García Ortiz's resignation. In statements to Efe, the association's president, Cristina Dexeus, emphasized that the image of the Attorney General sitting in the dock is "devastating." Dexeus believes that, although "the Prosecutor's Office is not being prosecuted," if García Ortiz remains in office, the image "projected" by the institution "is seriously compromised," and asserts that "the reputational damage is maximum." Therefore, she says it would be "logical" for him to resign.

Regarding the judges, the Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association (AJFV) calls the fact that the active Attorney General is being prosecuted "an absolute anomaly." His spokesperson, Sergio Oliva, invites García Ortiz to "deeply reflect" on the situation, as well as to consider "the institutional impact" of remaining in office and his "legitimate right to defense." Along the same lines, Francisco Portillo, president of the Independent Judicial Forum (FJI), stated that García Ortiz's prosecution once again makes it "timely" to ask whether the current attorney general "can continue to hold office."

Progressive associations distance themselves from the case.

However, Judges for Democracy has not commented on whether García Ortiz should resign or not, but points out that the evidence that the news was known by several media outlets "makes it difficult to assess whether there may be a crime of revealing secrets" and recalls Palomo's dissenting opinion. In any case, they refer to the trial, where this issue must be "clarified."

The Progressive Union of Prosecutors also focuses on a "glaring lack of evidence" and the fact that the appeals court's decision was not unanimous: "The dissenting opinion tells us that at least twenty other people could have had access to this famous email and have not been investigated," argued Mar. in statements to RNE. In the interview, González asserted that if the association he chairs were to call for the Attorney General's resignation, it would be making "two enormous mistakes." On the one hand, it was a mistake "in the defense of truth and justice," and on the other, "a great political error," he asserted.

Despite the situation, García Ortiz has repeatedly refused to resign. He had the support of the Spanish government throughout, a support that the executive maintains at this time: Pedro Sánchez assured yesterday, Tuesday, after the indictment was confirmed, that he believes in the innocence of the Attorney General, that he "has the endorsement" of the Spanish government. The PP, on the other hand, has used the case to pressure the state executive for not having forced García Ortiz's departure, and has urged the Attorney General himself to resign on several occasions.