Legal language is often technical and difficult to understand, but this is assumed to be necessary to meet the requirement of specificity expected in judges' rulings—especially when they are convictions. Therefore, it is surprising that in the case of the Attorney General, the Supreme Court justices resorted to an example they themselves consider "simple" to explain, plainly and simply, why they convicted Álvaro García Ortiz. "The plastic surgeon who has operated on a celebrity, whose physical transformation has generated a public debate about whether their new appearance is the result of surgery or any other medical procedure, can never participate in the controversy by confirming or denying the reality of this operation. If they did so, they would incur criminal liability." It is understood that the Attorney General is the surgeon and that Alberto González Amador is the patient who underwent cosmetic surgery. The same principle, the ruling explains, would apply if a patient's medical information were disclosed.

The prosecutor in the Pujol family trial stated this morning that "Political issues cannot be introduced into a procedural, legal, and substantive matter such as the investigation and prosecution of crimes." The statement is so perfect that if you asked an actor to say it... Poland And adding canned laughter in the background would work as a gag.

Long gone are the days when Pedro Sánchez praised the "independent work of the Supreme Court" and proclaimed that in Spain "no one is judged for their ideas or their political project." This is what he defended in October 2019 in an institutional statement at the Moncloa Palace to assess the verdict in the Catalan independence trial that convicted the pro-independence leaders of sedition. Six years later, when it is the Attorney General appointed by the Socialist leader who has suffered a setback from a court with a very similar composition—four of the five judges who opted to disqualify Álvaro García Ortiz signed the October 1st ruling—the Spanish president's reaction has been quite different. Despite Sánchez's assertion, as he did previously, that he "respects" and "accepts" the Attorney General's conviction, this time the Socialist leader defended his right to disagree with the Supreme Court and predicted that "time will put things right," referring to the possibility of a reversal by the Constitutional Court or European justice. During Wednesday's question time, Sánchez, as he did on Sunday, defended García Ortiz's innocence despite the Supreme Court's ruling and cast suspicion on the high court's handling of the matter, given the revelation of the cone. "This government will always stand for the truth," Sánchez emphasized, contrasting it with the testimony of the journalists who exonerated García Ortiz in court with the "lies" he attributes to Isabel Díaz Ayuso's inner circle. This approach has provoked outrage from the PP and Vox. In the opinion of the PP president, Sánchez does not respect the judges and is issuing "an unprecedented challenge to the Supreme Court." "He is becoming increasingly dangerous for democracy," Alberto Núñez Feijóo emphasized, echoing the views of the Madrid president, who sees a dictatorial drift in the head of the Spanish government and called on Monday for more voices to dare to denounce him.

Coinciding with November 25th, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, the Spanish government responded to the Supreme Court's disqualification of the Attorney General with a highly symbolic nomination. Teresa Peramato (Salamanca, 1962), a progressive and feminist prosecutor who has dedicated her career to combating gender-based violence, will take over from Álvaro García Ortiz, who was convicted on November 20th, the 50th anniversary of Franco's death. "Peramato is a career prosecutor with 35 years of experience and enjoys the unanimous recognition of legal professionals," sources at La Moncloa (the Prime Minister's official residence) explained regarding her selection. Peramato currently serves as the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court and is the Delegate Prosecutor for the Protection and Guardianship of Victims in Criminal Proceedings. The Spanish government has highlighted her "extensive career, especially in the fight against gender violence." "She is considered one of the leading figures in judicial specialization in this area," they emphasize. In 2005, Peramato was appointed delegate prosecutor for the section on violence against women in the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor's Office and, in 2021, she was promoted to senior prosecutor specializing in violence against women. The Minister of Justice, Félix Bolaños, has emphasized that she "played a significant role" in the implementation of the law against gender violence passed in 2004. One of Peramato's key campaigns has been the specific criminalization of vicarious violence, that perpetrated by the aggressor in the context of unfinished business. The future Attorney General has also declared her support for the controversial law on... Only yes means yes, promoted by the Ministry of Equality, headed by Irene Montero. "The law contributes many things because it establishes affirmative consent as a fundamental principle and, therefore, shifts the burden that previously fell on victims to prove that they opposed and resisted," she argued in 2022.

It's bad when judicial decisions are interpreted as if they were a football match: conservatives 5, progressives 2. This is how the news reports of the Supreme Court's ruling that disqualifies the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, for two years are being headlined. And what's worse is that if political interpretations of high court decisions have become commonplace, it's because the signs of politicization of the judiciary persist; some judges even readily identify themselves by their ideological leanings.

The conviction of the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, for the crime of disclosing classified information has generated a triumphant atmosphere on the morning shows of Antena 3 and Telecinco. Ana Rosa Quintana began her program with one of those monologues she reads with pride, a powerful and assertive text that she delivers verbatim: "Who is going to apologize to the citizens? Who is going to apologize to the justice system? Who is going to apologize to the separation of powers? These apologies should be offered by the president for issuing the sentence before the judges declared innocent the prosecutor who was under his authority." Quintana called García Ortiz "the prosecutor with the removable robe" and asserted that Pedro Sánchez "wants to go down in history by killing Montesquieu, and he has succeeded." On the enormous screen that dominates the set and the panelists' table, giant letters announced "Prosecutor Convicted" accompanied by a black and white photograph of the protagonist with a defeated expression.

The Supreme Court's decision to disqualify the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, came just a week after the trial ended, but the drafting of the ruling could take much longer and run to dozens of pages. Legal experts consulted by ARA are awaiting the judges' arguments, which will require them to justify how, based on the evidence presented at the trial—the journalists exonerated him—they concluded that García Ortiz was the one who leaked the messages in which the lawyer for businessman Alberto González Amador Ayuso attempted to reach a plea bargain with the Prosecutor's Office and admitted that his client had committed tax fraud. While awaiting the judges' justification, the connection between the two cases is leading various voices to question the potential impact of the Attorney General's conviction on the González Amador case.

Álvaro García Ortiz overshadowed Francisco Franco on the 50th anniversary of his death. The day, marked in red on the Spanish government's calendar to commemorate the arrival of democracy, was marred by the Supreme Court's conviction of the Attorney General. Amid accusations from the right of having degraded Spanish democracy and calls for his resignation, Pedro Sánchez went to Congress to celebrate the end of the Franco regime. "Democracy is a privilege that we must defend every day," the Spanish president proclaimed at the presentation, coinciding with November 20th, of the series Anatomy of a Moment (Movistar+), based on Javier Cercas' book about the 23-F coup attempt and filmed in the lower house of parliament. Amid the media frenzy surrounding the decision of the five conservative judges, Sánchez has made a point of attending the screening of the first episode of this production.

The "seen for judgment" in the trial of the Attorney General and the endorsement of the amnesty by the Advocate General of the European Union will lead to the same thing: the discrediting of a politicized Spanish justice system.

The trial of the Attorney General in the Supreme Court has concluded and is now awaiting judgment. after six sessions which failed to resolve the central question in the case against Álvaro García Ortiz: Who leaked the email containing confidential information about Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner? After analyzing the facts presented at the oral hearing, the prosecution insisted on blaming the head of the public prosecutor's office, for whom they are seeking a prison sentence of between three and six years. However, García Ortiz's defense countered that "they have no evidentiary basis." "There is no proof," insisted state attorney Ignacio Ocio this Thursday, during his closing arguments that concluded the two-week trial. Ocio proclaimed García Ortiz "innocent" and warned that "the constitutional activity" of the Attorney General has been criminalized, after yesterday's statement as the sole defendant has declined to exercise his right to speak last.

Álvaro García Ortiz shed the robes of Attorney General he had worn throughout the trial to finally testify as the defendant for an hour and a half. In the fifth session of the oral proceedings at the Supreme Court, García Ortiz underwent a carefully measured cross-examination—answering only questions from his defense and the prosecution—focusing on distancing himself from the leak of the email containing confidential information about Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner. The head of the Public Prosecutor's Office avoided a political defense, despite the case's obvious political implications, and also steered clear of direct confrontation with the prosecution, which is seeking up to six years in prison for revealing secrets. He made a special mention of businessman Alberto González Amador, who is acting as a private prosecutor, accusing him of having acted with "disloyalty." "There is no procedural loyalty in the search for the truth," he asserted regarding González Amador's actions from the moment he filed the complaint. According to García Ortiz, it was Ayuso's boyfriend who instigated the "political use" of information regarding his negotiations with the Prosecutor's Office to reach a plea agreement in the tax fraud investigation against him. While García Ortiz has asserted that he acted solely out of a desire to defend the "honor" of the Prosecutor's Office, damaged by insinuations from Ayuso and her associates, the Attorney General has questioned González Amador's intentions when he forwarded a message to the president's right-hand man, Julián Salto, dated March 12, 2024. In that message, he responded to the plea agreement request made by Ayuso's boyfriend's former lawyer, Carlos Neira, in an email dated February 2. This document was allegedly leaked to the Attorney General. García Ortiz has denied this allegation. "I did not send it to anyone outside the Prosecutor's Office," He emphasized.

In the trial of the State Attorney General, the parties are placing great importance on the accuracy of the times and dates in the descriptions given by the witnesses. This is because the central question the trial must answer is who first leaked the email containing confidential information about Alberto González Amador, Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner. Disseminating it once it has been published is no longer considered a crime of revealing secrets, hence the importance of discovering the source of the original leak, which is the criminal act. A few minutes can make all the difference in determining who was responsible. After the first three sessions of the trial and hearing from the first twenty witnesses, it has become clear that ten days in March 2024 are the key period, with the night of the 13th being particularly relevant.

Which the origin of the leak of confidential information Regarding the tax fraud case involving Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner, this is the key question in the case against Álvaro García Ortiz, which has not received a conclusive answer in the third session of the trial, largely due to the fact that the journalists who testified were able to invoke professional secrecy to avoid revealing who leaked the information to them. However, José Precedo, deputy director in Eldiario.es, He exonerated the Attorney General on Wednesday, the only person currently on trial in the Supreme Court. "In 22 years of my career, Álvaro García Ortiz has never given me a single document. I know who the source of this story is, but I won't say due to journalistic privilege. I have a moral dilemma because there's a person facing prison time, and I know he's innocent," the journalist from the online newspaper concluded.. Precedo has asserted that he had access to the email dated February 2, 2024, in which Alberto González Amador's former lawyer, Carlos Neira, proposed a plea bargain—which would have involved pleading guilty—to economic crimes prosecutor Julián Salto, a week before the leak attributed to García Ortiz. Investigators place the Attorney General's leak on the night of March 13, 2024, and Precedo claims to have had the email on March 6. González Amador's current lawyer, acting as a private prosecutor, has questioned the journalist's version. "Why was he the last to publish the email if he was the first to have it?" asked Gabriel Rodríguez-Ramos. La Sexta and Cadena SER reported on it before... Eldiario.es of the content of the communication that refuted a previous news item published in The World at 9:29 p.m. on March 13—which erroneously attributed the initiative for the pact to the Prosecutor's Office. "The information was not intended to cause harm the prestige of the Public Prosecutor's Office"," said Esteban Urreiztieta, the author of this reportThe WorldThis triggered alarms at the public prosecutor's office and led to the publication of a press release the following day to refute it. Faced with this whirlwind, Precedo justified waiting to publish, despite having the information, citing, among other reasons, "respect" for his source, who asked him not to disclose the email.

The second session of the trial of the Attorney General of Spain saw a battle erupt over the narrative between Isabel Díaz Ayuso's inner circle and that of the Spanish government. The testimony of Miguel Ángel Rodríguez (MÁR), the Madrid president's chief of staff, and Alberto González Amador, Ayuso's partner, raised the deafening tone in the Supreme Court. According to their version of events, González Amador was the victim of a political conspiracy aimed at undermining Ayuso. González Amador accused Álvaro García Ortiz of having "publicly destroyed" him with the leak, for which, as a private prosecutor, he is seeking a four-year prison sentence for the head of the public prosecutor's office and €300,000 in compensation for the "damage" caused. "They have ruined my life: either I leave Spain or I commit suicide," he declared in a closing statement after nearly two hours of testimony.

A brief No This was the only intervention by the Attorney General in the first session of the trial at the Supreme Court. Álvaro García Ortiz denied with this monosyllable that he considers himself "responsible" for the disclosure of secrets of which he is accused, when the presiding judge, Andrés Martínez Arrieta, asked him the question at the beginning of the hearing. His defense team was responsible for presenting their arguments – they will not testify until November 12. The Attorney General, Consuelo Castro, issued a comprehensive rebuke of Judge Ángel Hurtado's investigation, deeming it "biased," "inquisitorial," and "prospective." "He was subjected to an unfair procedure," Castro emphasized, arguing that García Ortiz suffered "defenselessness" and that a series of fundamental rights were violated, including the right to privacy, the presumption of innocence, and effective judicial protection.

The Attorney General of the State He no longer had any chance of avoiding the trialThe Supreme Court had already announced the composition of the court that will try him, with a conservative majority, and only the dates of the oral hearing remained to be announced. This Friday, the high court announced that it will be held from November 3 to 13. There will be six sessions, morning and afternoon, spread over two weeks to determine whether Álvaro García Ortiz was the one who leaked the email in which Isabel Díaz Ayuso's boyfriend admitted to tax fraud before the Prosecutor's Office. Alberto González Amador will, in fact, be one of the witnesses in the trial, along with the chief of staff of the Madrid president, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez (MÁR). A total of 40 witnesses will testify.

The Supreme Court judge investigating the State Attorney General for disclosure of secrets has taken the final step of sending him to trial. The investigating judge in the case, Ángel Hurtado, ordered this Tuesday to open an oral trial against Álvaro García Ortiz for allegedly leaking the email from Isabel Díaz Ayuso's boyfriend to the Prosecutor's Office, in which Alberto González Amador admitted to tax fraud. Hurtado also imposed a bail of 150,000 euros "to cover any financial liabilities that may arise," that is, the payment of possible compensation to González Amador for "moral damages." If García Ortiz does not hand over the documents within five days, his assets will be seized "to secure that amount." Furthermore, the judge refused to provisionally suspend him from his duties as head of the Public Prosecutor's Office and thus rejected the request made by the Independent Professional Association of Prosecutors (APIF), one of the popular accusations.

Being right is good, but it can be sad. This is the case with what's happening in Madrid today. They organize that event at the Supreme Court –incidentally, in the same room where the Proceso trial was held– where the judicial year is being declared open. A solemn act in which the Attorney General of the State will appear while he is being prosecuted for the leak of some emails about Ayuso's partner, and an act which Feijóo will not attend, in his capacity as leader of the opposition, precisely in protest because the Attorney General of the State goes.

Nine months ago the Supreme Court made the step of impeaching a State Attorney General for the first time in democracyThe investigation into the disclosure of secrets by Judge Ángel Hurtado has led to the prosecution of Álvaro García Ortiz, who is facing trial before the criminal court once yesterday. The appeals chamber of the high court confirmed that there is sufficient evidence of a crime for trying him for allegedly leaking "confidential information" about Isabel Díaz Ayuso's boyfriend. It's impossible to explain the scope of the case without mentioning the Madrid president and her personal battle with Pedro Sánchez, who appointed the Attorney General of the State in the summer of 2022. For the PSOE, the case against García Ortiz is part of the right-wing political and judicial persecution strategy against the PP president, while the PP leader tries to destroy her.

The Attorney General of the State, Álvaro García Ortiz, will not be able to avoid trial for revealing secrets in the case of Isabel Díaz Ayuso's boyfriend. The Supreme Court's appeals division rejected the appeals filed by both his defense and the Prosecutor's Office, with a dissenting vote against the majority decision. Thus, García Ortiz sees his last chance to avoid trial for allegedly leaking the email in which Alberto González Amador's defense admitted to the Prosecutor's Office that his client had committed two tax offenses thwarted. Instead, the high court opted to exonerate the chief prosecutor of the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor's Office and unanimously ordered the dismissal of the case against Pilar Rodríguez.