The Public Prosecutor's Office has claimed this before the Madrid High Court file the case in which it investigates whether the Public Prosecutor’s Office committed a crime by issuing a statement with which it tried to deny several hoaxes about the double tax fraud of businessman Alberto González Amador, partner of Isabel Díaz Ayuso. And in the event that this request is denied, he demands that González Amador himself be the one to explain “which people” had the information about the pact with the Public Prosecutor’s Office that is the subject of that press release.
In a letter to which elDiario.es has had access, prosecutor Francisco Javier Montero rejects the existence of the crime of revealing secrets that González Amador attributes to the two prosecutors against whom he has filed a complaint for allegedly revealing secrets about the tax fraud that he himself has acknowledged and for which he has offered a pact with the Public Prosecutor's Office to avoid being put in prison. The prosecutor defends that the Public Prosecutor's Office has limited itself to “denying the lies published, among others, by the chief of staff of the regional president himself.
However, in the event that the judge investigating the case, Francisco José Goyena, refuses to file the case, the prosecutor believes that he must provide more evidence to find out where the information came from. Among other things, he demands that Alberto González Amador and his lawyer, Carlos Neira, appear as witnesses to explain to whom they sent the emails that were published by various media before the aforementioned statement was issued. Specifically, they are asked to explain “which people have had access and/or received a copy of the support of the communications.” [con la Fiscalía]”.
In the event that the judge refuses to file the case, the prosecutor also requests that the employees of the law firm in which Neira is a partner who could have access to those communications be identified. Likewise, she requests that the staff of both the court and the tax agency who could have access to the complaint that the Public Prosecutor's Office has filed against González Amador for crimes of tax fraud and document forgery be identified.
The Madrid TSJ has accused both prosecutor Julián Salto, who charged Ayuso's partner with fraud of 350,000 euros, of revealing secrets; as well as her superior, the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor, Pilar Rodríguez, for a statement in which the Madrid Public Prosecutor's Office denied information provided by the President's Chief of Staff, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez; as reported by various media outlets. Information published by media such as Libertad Digital, El Debate or Vozpópuli, among others, in which it was stated that the Public Prosecutor's Office had offered the agreement to the businessman, but had withdrawn due to “orders from above”, when it had happened the opposite.
Combat false information
The Public Prosecution Service, then listen to the two suspects and several witnesses, such as the chief prosecutor of the Community of Madrid, Almudena Lastraor the head of communications of the office, understands that the case must be archived. Firstly, by understanding that the content of the statement has no criminal relevance and that it has not affected the defense of González Amador, who to this day continues to investigate this pact to avoid prison: “The emails referred to are not evidence,” he says at the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which also recalls that they had already been published by various media.
Secondly, I remember that the aim was not to reveal secrets, but to combat this false information. “He limited himself to denying, with chronologically systematized facts, the lies published by the newspapers El Mundo and Libertad Digital, as well as by the head of the office of the president of the Community of Madrid,” he adds. Neither Prosecutor Salto nor his superior, the provincial prosecutor, were responsible for a statement ordered by the prosecutor himself. attorney general of the stateÁlvaro García Ortiz, as he himself has acknowledged.
The prosecutor thus claims that the decision to distribute the press release was approved by the Attorney General with his express and direct instructions, and that he – and no one else – is the most responsible person (in rank) who agreed to or approved the decision to distribute the statement with the content ultimately sent.
Furthermore, she reiterates that the decision to disseminate this press release was “fully in accordance with the law and was a response to the legally entrusted function of informing public opinion” about the events taking place within the scope of her jurisdiction. Throughout his letter, he explains that the first news quoted sources close to the businessman, which, according to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, excludes that it was the Public Prosecutor’s Office that leaked that information.
The proceedings are at a crucial point in the Madrid TSJ: the investigating judge has yet to decide whether to send the case to the Supreme Court of Justice, where Álvaro García Ortiz sits, as do both González Amador himself and the Illustrious Bar Association of Madrid, which exercises public prosecution.