THE Association of Prosecutorsmajority in the race for prosecutor, asked the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, to resign following the decision of the Supreme Court to open a trial against him for an alleged crime of revealing secrets.
“We would never have imagined that the institution could be found in such a critical and unfortunate situation in which the person who runs it is the subject of a criminal investigation,” said AF President Cristina Dexeus.
The AF considers, “without prejudice to the defense of the principle of presumption of innocence of Álvaro García Ortiz, as of any other citizen”, that “He cannot remain in office if he values the dignity of the prosecutor’s career.“, of the Prosecutor’s Office, of the institution which guarantees legality and the rights of citizens.”
“We, the prosecutors, have a series of specific incompatibilities, as well as our own ethical code that demands greater impartiality and probity from us,” Dexeus said.
The president of the AF recalled that the regulations governing the career of the prosecutor “provide for the possibility of dismissing from office an ordinary prosecutor in the event of the opening of criminal proceedings against him and this for the benefit of the appearance of impartiality and honesty. of the establishment.
“What appearance of impartiality can the prosecutor have who reports on the acts referred to the attorney general, if the latter is his hierarchical superior and continues to depend on him?” he asked.
For Dexeus, what will be evaluated in court are the specific actions of García Ortiz and whether he exceeded his duties. “That the Attorney General takes refuge behind the institution is unacceptable,” he believes.
For the AF, the fact of being investigated by the person who heads the public prosecutor’s office “generates unprecedented tension in the institution and erodes the credibility of the actions of those of us who represent it.
“To reverse this anomaly and regain respect for our work, resignation is an inevitable and essential step,” he says.
“He lost his status as a prestigious jurist”
For its part, the Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors (APIF) considers that García Ortiz “lost the status of recognized prestigious jurist“what the Constitution requires to be attorney general.
“East absolutely incompatible be a jurist of recognized prestige and, at the same time, be accused [sic] by the Supreme Court as a possible perpetrator of a crime”, he explains in a press release from this association, collected by Europa Press.
For the APIF, the Attorney General “has completely lost the authority that the head of the public prosecutor’s office should have” and, therefore, “There’s no way I can go on for even one more minute in this positiondirecting the institution throughout Spain, being able to expressly give orders to any prosecutor and on any matter.”
The APIF considers that it is “urgent and necessary” to modify the organic status of the public prosecutor’s office to include a new reason for dismissal of the state attorney general. The current regulations provide that the head of the public prosecutor’s office can only be dismissed from office for reasons of incompatibility, at his request, for incapacity, for serious breach of his duties or in the event of cessation of government, but not because he is under investigation for an alleged crime.
According to him, maintaining a state attorney general with the status of person under investigation “seriously deteriorates our rule of law.”
The UPF disagrees with the Supreme Court
The Progressive Union of Prosecutors, of which García Ortiz was the spokesperson, supported the action of the Attorney General and that of the provincial prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez.
The UPF showed its “deep concern” “pressure and wear” to which the figure of the head of the public prosecutor’s office and the institution itself are subject.
For this organization, the Supreme Court’s resolution “in no way implies the refutation of the presumption of innocence” of the Attorney General and shows, “in a calm but firm manner”, its disagreement with the argument of the High Court , since she considers that The facts investigated are not of a criminal nature.
For the UPF, the information note sent by the prosecution on March 14, 2024 is part of “the obligation of the prosecution to provide citizens with truthful information” and came to “clarify the information published in various media previously”. note”, this “without providing or revealing any data which was not already known to the public”.
The UPF launched a “public appeal for caution and moderation, respect for people, their presumption of innocence and the constitutional function exercised by prosecutors”.
