An association of prosecutors asks the Supreme Court to analyze all the messages and emails intercepted from the attorney general

The association of prosecutors that exercises the popular accusation against the attorney general in the investigation for revelation of secrets has asked the Supreme Court not to limit its investigation to five days in March and to analyze all the emails and messages related to the case and intercepted. the last seven months. The Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors, with representation in the Fiscal Council, has also asked Judge Ángel Hurtado to expand the case several weeks before the alleged leak of the emails that Alberto González Amador’s defense exchanged with the Prosecutor’s Office to seek a pact in his case of confessed double tax fraud.

Agents from the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard spent up to ten hours in the office of the attorney general, Álvaro García Ortiz, on October 30. Judge Hurtado’s order, after placing the case under summary secrecy, was to intervene in all his emails, WhatsApp messages and communications since last March 8th within the framework of the investigation into whether he was the one who leaked the emails to the press. of the defense of Isabel Díaz Ayuso’s partner. Subsequently, the magistrate explained to the Civil Guard that his analysis had to be limited to the messages strictly related to the case between the eighth and fourteenth of that month of March.

Hurtado’s last measure has been to partially lift the secrecy that weighed on this case regarding the revelation of secrets and has notified these complete records to the parties, after the Prosecutor’s Office had to appeal the blind search, without knowing the magistrate’s arguments to intervene in the communications of the attorney general. A new appeal now comes from the APIF, an association of prosecutors that exercises popular prosecution, asking the judge to do the opposite: expand the analysis to all the intercepted communications.

The document, signed by the lawyers Juan Antonio Frago and Verónica Suárez, requests that the case go back even further in the calendar and analyze the events since February 20 of this year, the date on which the Prosecutor’s Office sent the complaint against the courts to the courts. Alberto González Amador for tax fraud and document falsification. From that moment, says this association, “there may be prior communications that go through the phones of the two authorized persons, warning that a person of the media caliber of being the boyfriend of the regional president could have a procedure and, if applicable, of the existence of the subsequently leaked document.”

This association also understands that the analysis of the attorney general’s messages should not end on March 14, 2024 but should cover all the material seized by the UCO during ten hours of intervention at the headquarters of the Prosecutor’s Office on Fortuny Street in Madrid. “It cannot be ruled out that previous communications may appear requesting, selling or giving away the favor of the leak,” he states. They not only want to know García Ortiz’s possible conversations with journalists, but also with his number two in the Public Ministry, María Ángeles Sánchez Conde. “The conversations between the State Attorney General and the Lieutenant Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, today the prosecutor in charge of handling this matter, could be capital.”

The last move by Judge Hurtado has been to partially lift the secrecy of the summary so that the parties can fully understand the orders issued so far and be able to respond to the appeal presented by the Prosecutor’s Office against the search order. A sequence that implies that the Public Ministry had to appeal the registration without knowing the judge’s arguments, but that the parties now know those arguments to oppose their appeal.

“It is necessary to investigate any communication related to the crime investigated, the leak of the proposal for criminal compliance, without time limitation, with respect to the seized terminals,” settles the appeal presented by APIF.