An association of prosecutors requests the resignation of García Ortiz for "dignity of the institution" after the setback of the Supreme Court

Angela Martialay Madrid

Madrid

Updated Friday, March 1, 2024-14:23

• Courts Major blow from the Supreme Court to the García Ortiz Prosecutor's Office when opening a case against Puigdemont

• Justice The Supreme Court opens a case against Puigdemont for terrorism in the Tsunami while Junts negotiates the amnesty with Sánchez

The

Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors

(APIF) has requested this Friday the resignation of the State Attorney General,

Álvaro García Ortiz

, due to "dignity of the institution."

In a statement, this group highlights that the resolution of the Supreme Court, where it is agreed to open a criminal case against former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont, for crimes of terrorism in relation to Tsunami Democràtic, reveals "an action by the State Attorney General that discredits seriously to the Public Prosecutor's Office as an institution".

"The position maintained by the Public Ministry, in a relevant procedure, has been unanimously disavowed by the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court," adds the APIF, which emphasizes that "no position, in a democratic system, can be maintained in the exercise of its office." function when, in such a relevant matter, it is totally unauthorized by the highest jurisdictional authority of a country".

In the order notified yesterday, the High Court overturned the criteria of the lieutenant prosecutor of the TS, the progressive

Ángeles Sánchez-Conde

, who did not appreciate evidence against the fugitive from the

process

.

Sánchez-Conde, in her report, had in turn moved away from the path marked by a very large majority of High Court prosecutors who did see signs of terrorism against the Junts leader.

The fact of every unusual point, and which in turn demonstrates the magnitude of the blow dealt to the lieutenant and her boss García Ortiz, is that the Supreme Court referred to the opinion of the Criminal Prosecutors of the Supreme Court to open a case for the fugitive.

Furthermore, the final ruling issued by the Public Prosecutor's Office was preceded by enormous controversy due to the surprising change of opinion of the prosecutor assigned to inform Puigdemont,

Álvaro Redondo

, as this newspaper revealed.

"The management of the Public Prosecutor's Office demands a level in the exercise of its function that is incompatible with the blow received. The Public Prosecutor's Office cannot expose itself, not even one more minute, to this chain of discredit to which the prosecutor's actions are leading us. general", emphasizes the APIF.

In the statement, this association also highlights that "the case becomes more serious considering that the Board of Prosecutors of the Supreme Court, by a large majority (eleven to four), maintained the position of understanding that the reasoned exposition of the Investigating Judge of the National Court contained sufficient elements to consider that the facts investigated could be included in the crime of terrorism and that, in addition, there were indications to consider Puigdemont responsible for them."

Criterion set in 2020

Furthermore, in the order, the Court highlighted that it was Dolores Delgado herself, when she was Attorney General of the State, who stated in the

2020 Prosecutor's Office Report

that "within certain sectors of the independence movement, the mobilizations progressively increased and outlined the different dynamics, especially through Tsunami Democràtic and the attempts to paralyze the Barcelona airport and the attacks on public and police buildings", when analyzing the "violent Catalan independence movement".

On this point, the APIF emphasizes that "the Supreme Court not only bases its resolution on jurisprudence referring to events that have been considered terrorism but also cites the Report of the Attorney General's Office for the year 2020 in which the Public Prosecutor's Office established the facts referred to in the reasoned presentation of the Investigating Judge as falling within the crime of terrorism. Departing now from what was maintained four years ago should have had a very solid legal basis for it to find justification. The disavowal of the Supreme Court "makes it clear that there is no basis to deviate from the criteria that was established in 2020."

Tax sources consulted by

EL MUNDO

highlight that in the face of such "discredit", the lieutenant prosecutor should resign since "she has made a fool of herself not only before all her subordinates but before the legal community."

The same sources regret the "wear and tear" that the Public Prosecutor's Office is suffering with Álvaro García Ortiz at the helm "for bending to the interests of the Government."