Judge prosecutes State Attorney General for revealing secrets

Supreme Court (TS) judge Ángel Hurtado has agreed to prosecute the Attorney General of the State, Álvaro García Ortiz, and the head of the Provincial Prosecutor's Office of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez, for an alleged crime of revealing secrets committed against Alberto González Amador, partner of the Madrid president, Isabel Díaz Ayuso , based mainly on the leaked email where the businessman offered to admit crimes in order to reach an agreement. In addition, he insists on stating that he acted on "instructions" from the Government , reports Europa Press.

The decision comes eight months after the Supreme Court took over the investigation last October. Initially, when the matter was before the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM), the case focused on the press release issued by the Prosecutor's Office on March 14, 2024, detailing the email exchange between González Amador's defense team and the prosecutor in charge of the investigation, Julián Salto.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, the high court opened a case against the attorney general for alleged disclosure of secrets, but ruled out the criminal nature of the press release. However, in the following months, the investigation expanded to include the aforementioned press release again, to include the alleged leaks of the Prosecutor's Office's investigation against González Amador for alleged tax fraud, and to also include the email his defense sent on February 2, 2024, offering to admit to the tax offenses in exchange for a plea deal.

Now, having concluded the investigation, the investigating judge, Ángel Hurtado, believes that, at the level of circumstance, it can be presumed that García Ortiz provided the contents of that February 2 email to a media outlet, specifically 'Cadena SER', subject to "criteria of confidentiality and confidentiality."

Specifically, Hurtado has issued an order converting the preliminary investigation into an abbreviated procedure, equivalent to an indictment, against García Ortiz and Rodríguez , considering the evidence of a crime against them confirmed , Efe reports.

The magistrate points out that, at the circumstantial level, it can be presumed that the Attorney General provided a media outlet with the confidential content of an email , dated February 2, 2024, in which the lawyer of Alberto González Amador, boyfriend of the Madrid president , "by mutual agreement" admitted to the prosecutor the commission of two tax offenses in his name. An email that was sent to him by the chief prosecutor of the province of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez .

Hurtado emphasizes that the email contained sensitive information related to González Amador's personal details and profile , in a private conversation between the lawyer and the prosecutor that is subject to confidentiality and confidentiality criteria.

The decision comes eight months after the Supreme Court took over the investigation last October. Initially, when the matter was before the Madrid High Court (TSJM), the case focused on the press release issued by the Prosecutor's Office on March 14, 2024, detailing the email exchange between González Amador's defense team and the prosecutor in charge of the investigation, Julián Salto.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, the high court opened a case against the attorney general for alleged disclosure of secrets, but dismissed the press release as a criminal offense.

However, in the following months, the investigation expanded to include the aforementioned statement again, to include the alleged leaks of the Prosecutor's Office's proceedings against González Amador for alleged tax fraud, and to also include the email his defense sent on February 2, 2024, offering to admit to tax crimes in exchange for a plea deal.

Now, having concluded the investigation, Hurtado believes that, at the level of circumstance, it can be presumed that García Ortiz provided the contents of that February 2 email to a media outlet, specifically Cadena SER, subject to "criteria of confidentiality and confidentiality."

The magistrate emphasizes that, "following instructions received from the Presidency of the Government, and taking advantage of information published in the newspaper El Mundo , at 9:29 p.m. on March 13, 2024, entitled ' The Prosecutor's Office offers Ayuso's partner a pact to admit two tax offenses '", "he entered into a dynamic of a frenetic exchange of communications between different prosecutors , mainly through the messaging system using WhatsApp , to prepare a response, and to make it clear that, in the opinion of the investigated, the Prosecutor's Office had not offered any pact ."

And this, the investigator points out, "was intended to gain the prosecution's support for this information, on a matter of such minor relevance as who initiated the criminal settlement agreement."

Hurtado also highlights that, "at the same time, from the Attorney General's Office, and before the email of February 2, 2024 had been disseminated by other means," a copy of it was sent to the then Moncloa advisor Pilar Sánchez Acera , "who made use of it, giving instructions to Juan Lobato, spokesperson for the Socialist parliamentary group in the Madrid Assembly , to display it in his speech at the session on the 14th of the Assembly of the Community of Madrid, against the President of the Community, Isabel Díaz Ayuso ."

The Supreme Court maintains that this email "contained sensitive information relating to personal details and aspects of a citizen, which had been provided with a view to the effects of a subsequent criminal proceeding, in the course of private conversations between his lawyer and the prosecutor in charge of the case, subject to the criteria of confidentiality and reserve by the Prosecutor's Office, which must govern this type of conversation," and therefore states that "any disclosure to third parties without the authorization of the interested party is not tolerable, as their reputation could well be harmed by such disclosure."

For Hurtado, "the leak of the email calls into question the prestige of the institution , with the damage that this entails, if we look at the constitutional role and function entrusted to the Public Prosecutor's Office, subject in that function to principles such as legality and impartiality, which may be called into question to the extent that its actions are compromised by external indications, and, without a doubt, have undoubted detrimental effects on the fundamental right of defense of the affected party."

The investigator indicates that "all of this was accepted by the defendants, from the moment they gave confidential information they were privy to by virtue of their respective positions as prosecutors a publicity that it should not have received, as it did, when it was removed from the confidentiality for which it was intended."

Among the clues that lead him to place García Ortiz one step away from the bench , the instructor points out the fact that he deleted the information contained in his cell phones and in his personal Gmail account .

"The person under investigation, unlike the person under investigation, has made any information that could be on his mobile devices disappear, which, being this the case, thanks to the securing of evidence that was kept in mind from the beginning, could have allowed access to information, presumably relevant , as indicated by the very circumstance of making it disappear, thereby frustrating a part of the investigation that could have been agreed upon and be useful, on the material that was intended to be secured for an eventual analysis," he reproaches him.

He also took the opportunity to respond to the defense's briefs, which asked him to close the investigation, arguing that the fact that both González Amador and his lawyer, Carlos Neira, acknowledged before the Supreme Court that the businessman was aware of the negotiations to reach an agreement breaks any secrecy that could protect them.

Hurtado disagrees, reasoning that secrecy is "a concept associated with personal privacy, which therefore enjoys constitutional protection , thereby guaranteeing the right of its owner to be exclusively the one who freely chooses to whom he transmits his own message, so that, if it concerns the secrets of an individual, their protection depends exclusively on the will of the affected party."

" Your privacy will be violated if a third party removes them illegally and against your will and disseminates them , with the resulting harm that this entails. Therefore, the secret will exist as long as its owner does not want to make it public, and the secret will continue to be a secret as long as it is not revealed, and, if another party reveals it, they will be violating the confidentiality inherent in that secret and, thereby, violating a right to personal privacy," he emphasizes.

However, he concludes that " the confidentiality and reserve to which González Amador was entitled regarding the specific content of the email of February 2, 2024, was only broken when someone other than him and without his authorization leaked its content" because "one thing was the consented disclosure of the email of March 12, 2024, which does not entail any breach of the confidentiality that characterizes the crime of disclosure of decrees, and another completely different thing was the leak of the content of the personal data of a citizen, which he did not authorize, and its subsequent continuation in the note of the 14th."

Pilar Rodríguez

Regarding the Supreme Court judge's decision to prosecute the head of the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor's Office, Pilar Rodríguez , along with García Ortiz, he concludes that he knew that the emails relating to González Amador would be disseminated .

In a ruling issued this Monday, reported by Europa Press, Hurtado maintains that Rodríguez "knew" that the emails relating to González Amador "that he sent to the Attorney General" were being "handled in a manner unrelated to the purposes of the criminal proceedings for which they were created."

"From the outset, I knew that their purpose would be to prepare a report to refute information circulating on social media. Therefore, given this, it can reasonably be assumed that such material would be disseminated through similar social media platforms, thereby breaking the confidentiality and secrecy framework for which they were designed," he notes.

In this regard, the judge refers to the conversation that Rodríguez herself had with the chief prosecutor of the Madrid Superior Prosecutor's Office, Almudena Lastra, in which she warned her that the emails could be leaked .

Within the framework of the ruling, the investigator also highlights Rodríguez's participation in the production of the press release issued by the Prosecutor's Office on March 14, 2024, detailing the exchanges between Díaz Ayuso's boyfriend's lawyer and the prosecutor handling her case, Julián Salto.

Hurtado emphasizes that the draft of the note "passed through his hands" and the Attorney General specifically asked him: "Take a look at it and tell me if it's correct (not the dates, which are correct), but the substance." For the investigator, this is "much more than a formality, as he approves its substantive content."

Furthermore, the judge maintains that Rodríguez seemed "unhappy" with the content of the note and recalls that she told García Ortiz: "Although it makes me want to add a little more cyanide." In this sense, he considers that she had an "active involvement" in the preparation of the press release, which was also distributed under the heading of the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor's Office, of which she is the head.

Thus, the investigating judge indicates that he cannot dismiss the proceedings against Rodríguez, as his defense requested, and orders his prosecution for the alleged crime of disclosure of secrets.