The Appeal Chamber of the Supreme Court (TS) has accessed the request of the State Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, that he summarizes as a witness to the President’s from the Community of Madrid, Alberto González Amador.
Thus, he corrects the decision of the instructor magistrate Ángel Hurtado, who on January 27 rejected García Ortiz’s request in the framework of the cause in which he is investigated for revelation of secrets attributed to him González Amador.
Hurtado denied the application by considering that González Amador’s position was collected in the complaint and was evidenced in his lawyer’s action in the case. For the instructor, the request of the Attorney General supposed “a delay for the declaration of the investigated”, apart from understanding that it could be harmful to the accused.
The Appeal Chamber responds now that he does not see reasons to denied the declaration of testimony to the complainant when who asks for it is the defense of the investigated himself, while affecting that the appearance of González Amador “no doubt” It can be useful in the cause.
«Being the defense itself who requests the declaration of the complainant, we see no reason for his denial, since it will be affected by the alleged dissemination who will offer the contours of his performance. The complainant as the complainant is so available to the instruction, so we will access his declaration, in the exposed terms, that is, to find out all the contours of the alleged dissemination of data, ”argues the court.
In line, remember that the Criminal Procedure Law establishes that the investigating judge will practice the proceedings proposed by the Prosecutor’s Office or any of the person, “if they do not consider them useless or harmful.”
Within the framework of the resolution, which has been notified this Friday, the Chamber accesses another of García Ortiz’s requests that the instructor denied on January 27: the ratification and clarification of the report of the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard giving account of the expert diligence related to the material intervened in the records of the headquarters of the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office of Madrid.
It rejects asking the mobile from the Ayuso Cabinet Chief
For its part, the Appeal Chamber dismisses the request of the Attorney General to cite several journalists as witnesses to understand that they have limited themselves to fulfilling “with their informative mission and, therefore, have performed their work with the professionalism that characterizes them.” In addition, remember that “they are protected by constitutional right not to reveal their sources.”
Also He has rejected the mobile for his overturning Miguel Ángel Rodríguez, chief of cabinet of the president of the Community of Madrid, who already declared as a witness to the instructor.
For the magistrates, there is no need for Rodríguez, as a witness, to deliver his phone. «This person does not affect any confidentiality duty With regard to actions, ”they point out and affect that such request should be” endowed with some special reason “that the defense, in his opinion, does not detail.
In this sense, the Chamber recalls that what it is about investigating is “if the confidentiality of the public function that the State Attorney General and the Provincial Chief Prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez,” in relation to documentary elements under its control, not of the action of third parties, aspects that could hypothetically interest the investigation, which is why this point of the appeal will be dismissed will be dismissed. “
