The question now is to investigate how that email, which only the Prosecutor’s Office had, reached the journalists who published it. Obviously the road is full of obstacles because it will come up against the professional secrecy of journalists and that of some lawyers.
When the laws are clear and precise, the judge’s role consists of nothing more than proving a fact.”
There are columns that are not pleasant to write and this is one of them.
The Supreme Court has opened an unprecedented criminal investigation against the State Attorney General for revealing secrets. There was no other option. So neither lawfare No nonsense: there is a shady matter that directly affects a confidential attorney-client communication that harms a citizen’s right to defense. It doesn’t matter who the hell the citizen is. That this is not about the Ayuso couple, Ayuso and the socialist Government. This is what it is. For me it is not a political battle but a battle over limits. Democracy is made of limits and the prohibition of the violation of rights, also and above all for the State Attorney General’s Office and those who represent it.
According to the order of the Supreme Court signed unanimously – of which a progressive magistrate who was even proposed by this sector to preside over the TS itself has been the speaker – what is being investigated is not whether the press release could have violated the rights of the accused; What is being discussed is whether it was the State Attorney General who leaked to journalists the information that later allowed him to prepare the press release and whether this is how those rights were violated. The crime – if there is one, only if it is proven in the investigation – is the leak of the acknowledgment of guilt made by the lawyer when seeking the agreement. I already explained in another column –Portrait of prosecutor in black and white– that making public a sentence acknowledging guilt written by a lawyer, completely clumsy but a lawyer, to communicate with a prosecutor put the right of defense at risk.
The Prosecutor’s Office always claimed that the press release did not violate any secrets because the media had already spread it before. That did not explain anything since there could only be two origins of the previous leak: the interested party himself or the prosecutors. Disregarding the fact that the person investigated himself had pointed the gun at his chest, only the prosecutors remain and that is what the Supreme Court order says. On the other hand, the process of filtering something and then collecting it in a note is very simple, especially when even the Press Director of the Madrid Prosecutor’s Office has already told you that he does not plan to send the note that is given to him in writing and that you have Ordered to ship that same night.
It is not a trivial topic. The right to defense is a pillar of the rule of law; Violating it, through the violation of lawyers’ secrecy, is a very serious offense, so much so that it cost Baltasar Garzón his career due to the wiretapping of lawyer Choclán in prison while he was communicating with his client. On this occasion, it was also the lawyers, through their collegiate organization, who filed a complaint before a court that decided to make a reasoned presentation to the Supreme Court, given the capacity of Alvaro García. To limit it and discredit it due to the rest of the complaints from more or less despicable organizations, which are also accumulated, is to divert the shots. I challenge you to find a lawyer who applauds the dissemination of that email between lawyer and prosecutor.
The question now is to investigate how that email, which only the Prosecutor’s Office had, reached the journalists who published it. Obviously the road is full of obstacles because it will come up against the professional secrecy of journalists and that of some lawyers. Therefore, if the path taken by the email screenshots cannot be proven, it will be dismissed and an abbreviated procedure will not be initiated, but investigating must be investigated. The statements have made clear the path followed by the reserved mail from its original guardian, the Madrid prosecutor for Economic Crimes, to the State Attorney General. What the Supreme Court will now look for is the path from the prosecutors to the journalists, given that it has established in that authorship the crime of revelation of which it considers that the elements of the type exist: the authority that could commit them and the damage to the right of defense . Not even the court knows if the route was direct or if there were intermediaries and, the truth is, thinking that the information traveled from Fortuny to a certain office in Moncloa and from there to the journalists is dizzying but it is not dismissed either.
Thus, for the first time in history, the State Attorney General is accused of a crime punishable by more than four years in prison. Should he undertake his defense from his position or should he leave it to defend himself without implicating the institution? It is a delicate issue, given that the institution can give orders to prosecutors who have to intervene in their own case. In any case, the legislator never thought that the chief defender of legality would end up accused of violating it, so there is nothing planned, although logic immediately suggests the answer.
I’m sorry to say it, because I know Álvaro García much better than most of my readers, but this decision – and that “we lose the story” – was a major screw-up on the part of the visible head of an institution that should have known how to stand by. above good and evil. What the hell, and excuse me, does the Prosecutor’s Office care about the story? Since when does the Prosecutor’s Office deny hoaxes with nocturnality and treachery? Isn’t it more true that the Government was interested in blaming the guilt of Ayuso’s entourage? Do you know how many inaccuracies or malevolence are published about prosecutorial or judicial procedures that are secret? Those of us who have worked as communication directors for judges and prosecutors know that it is neither a mission nor a custom nor is there any need to come forward with information published no matter how inaccurate it may be and, in any case, it is denied and nothing more. If there is one thing the holder of a position like that of attorney general must know how to do, it is to be above good and evil, not lose his temper, not follow instructions and put the dignity of the institution and his own above any other consideration. . That night they lost their nerve, they followed instructions and pressure and they forgot that the dignity of the institution is paramount, because people pass by but the institution remains and is essential.
Wild times. I already said all this to Álvaro García Ortíz in person. I’ve never had any other opinion. The Supreme Court has no choice but to investigate this matter which, no matter what is said, is serious. This is not about Ayuso, the Government or the media fight. This is about democracy, rights, controls and that the law is the same for everyone.
And that matters more than anyone’s story.
#Supreme #Court #investigate #attorney #general
