The siege on García Ortiz accelerates: a month of secrecy, a month of silence and a month as “ultimately responsible” | EUROtoday

Protected by the truth that “the right to truthful information prevailed”, Garca Ortiz has emerged as “ultimately responsible” for the Prosecutor's assertion by which the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) retains a case open as a consequence of an alleged revelation of secrets and techniques. The State Attorney General considers that the complaints that give rise to this case – filed by Alberto González Amadorcouple of Isabel Diaz Ayuso and by the Madrid Bar Association -, represent “persecution of the persecutor” and defends that the motion of the Public Ministry was “proportionate.” If yesterday the TSJM requested to determine “the person most responsible” for that assertion, in latest weeks García Ortiz has insisted, on as much as three events, that he was the one who endorsed the be aware and is “responsible for it.” He did it after EL MUNDO revealed that it was he who ordered the discharge of the assertion about González Amador to the highest prosecutor in Madrid, Almudena Lastra.

On February 13, the Provincial Prosecutor of Madrid filed a criticism towards the boyfriend of the Madrid president for an alleged crime of tax fraud. The formal accusation was preceded by felony investigation proceedings of which Gonzlez Amador was conscious and to which his lawyer responded, on February 2, providing the Prosecutor's Office an “agreement in order to recognize the criminal acts and settle for a certain criminal sanction”. All this occurred in secret, since it will be March 12 – a month after the criticism – when the information of the investigation into Ayuso's associate would attain elDiario.es.

A day later, this newspaper printed info titled The Prosecutor's Office gives Ayuso's associate an settlement to confess two tax crimes whereas prosecuting the case. In that information, for the primary time, the existence of conversations to succeed in a attainable settlement between Ayuso's associate and the Prosecutor's Office was reported. After exchanges of calls, a prosecutor who needed to depart a Champions League match and disagreements between the press chiefs, the Prosecutor's Office issued a press launch on March 14 during which it revealed that it was Gonzlez Amador's lawyer who contacted contacted the Public Ministry to supply an settlement with which “she would recognize the author of the commission of two crimes.” Thus, mentioned assertion uncovered the key content material of the emails exchanged between the lawyer of Ayuso's associate, Carlos Neiraand the prosecutor in command of the matter, Julin Salto.

Although García Ortiz has subsequently defended on a number of events that the knowledge included in that press launch “was already known”, the College of Lawyers of Madrid (ICAM) and González Amador himself filed a criticism towards the Public Ministry for an alleged crime of showing secrets and techniques. The ICAM described the Prosecutor's assertion as an “unprecedented” occasion that violates the “right to confidentiality.” For his half, the Madrid president's boyfriend filed a criticism with the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJM on April 3 during which it identified the chief prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodriguezand to the financial crimes prosecutor and individual in command of the case, Julin Salto, for revealing the alternate of emails between González Amador's lawyer and the Public Ministry.

Faced with this judicial motion, and after a month of remaining silent on the matter, García Ortiz, in an institutional assertion that he issued on April 15, assured that he was not going to “consent” that the prosecutors have been “disturbed by exercising criminal action.” “I will not tolerate that any prosecutor has to bear the consequences of the transparent functioning of our institution,” he denounced, defending that the Public Ministry's assertion responds to the “fundamental right to freely receive truthful information” that have to be assured to residents.

The lawyer basic assured in that intervention that “he was informed of the events and the publication of a statement” and maintained that the be aware despatched by the Prosecutor's Office “did not contain information that could harm the right of defense or data of a confidential nature.” Thus, concerning the content material of the assertion, García Ortiz identified that it “was limited to denying fallacious information published by some media,” insisting that the Public Ministry acted with “absolute impartiality.” “I assume ultimate responsibility for that note,” he acknowledged, a slogan he would repeat twice extra within the subsequent 30 days.

Under the safety of those arguments, on April 25, the Prosecutor's Office requested the TSJM to inadmiss the criticism filed by González Amador. The request got here after the Board of Chamber Prosecutors endorsed, fractured, the place of the lieutenant prosecutor of the Supreme Court María Ángeles Sánchez Conde in favor of the inadmissibility of the criticism. However, this didn’t stop the TSJM from admitting to processing the complaints filed by González Amador and the ICAM on May 7.

That identical evening, García Ortiz spoke once more on the case. In an interview given to TVE, the lawyer basic insisted that publishing that assertion was the obligation of the Public Ministry to stop “intentionally false information from prospering.” “We cannot allow false information to be given knowing that it is false and that it also affects the Prosecutor's Office,” he acknowledged, denouncing that “two prosecutors cannot be intimidated in the exercise of their profession.” “I assume responsibility for that statement,” he reiterated, solely to repeat it two days later in an interview on Cadena SER. Some statements that purchase most relevance after yesterday the teacher of the TSJM, the Justice of the Peace Francisco José Goyenarequested to determine the “highest person in charge who approved the decision to disseminate the statement.”