MADRID, 7 May. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) has accepted for processing the complaint filed by Alberto González, partner of the president of the Community of Madrid Isabel Díaz Ayuso, against the chief prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez Fernández, and the criminal prosecutor economic Julián Salto Torres for the alleged commission of a crime of disclosure of secrets by an official after declaring the jurisdiction of this Chamber to hear the matter.
This is stated in a resolution, to which Europa Press had access, in which the Chamber accepts the reasoned statement submitted by the titular magistrate of the Court of Instruction No. 18 of Madrid, corresponding to the complaint filed for the same facts by the College of the Madrid Bar, which is considered to be the public prosecutor in the processing of the complaint that is the subject of this note.
At the same time, the Chamber appoints Judge Francisco José Goyena Salgado, member of the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJ of Madrid, as instructor of the case.
The alleged revelation of secrets is related to the information note released by the Madrid Prosecutor’s Office in which it was reported on the exchange of emails between the lawyer of the partner of the Madrid regional president and the prosecutor related to the investigation into alleged tax fraud. .
The admission of the complaint takes place after the report against the prosecutor María de la O Silva, who urged its inadmissibility as it lacks criminal relevance. It so happens that this prosecutor has been removed from the case and will be replaced by the senior prosecutor of Extremadura, Javier Montero.
In the order, the Chamber considers that “without the admission of a complaint ever being understood as an act of advance imputation, nor a finalized classification of the facts, the true scope of all the facts related in the written statement must be investigated. the complaint”.
“Only in this way can an essential purpose of the summary be fulfilled, as contemplated in article 299 of the LeCrim, and which consists of the determination of all the circumstances that may influence the classification of the facts, provided that these are indicatively criminal in nature,” he points out.
The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJ of Madrid does not agree with the Public Ministry when it considers that the complaint should be inadmissible, given that, in its opinion, “the facts reported therein are atypical.”
The judges, on the other hand, understand that this argument limits the debate from a very specific perspective that does not seem to encompass all the projections of the criminal sphere of the revelation of secrets.
The magistrates add that “in its report the Public Prosecutor’s Office gives reasons for why it provided an information note” in reference to the fact that it was carried out “to discover certain information.”
Furthermore, the Prosecutor’s Office denies that this information note contains anything that was not known, stating that it was “empowered by its own organic regulations by linking to the free exercise of freedom of information the duty to convey the newsworthy fact to society.”
Thus, the Chamber points out, “it is necessary to analyze whether the duty of confidentiality and secrecy inherent to criminal proceedings has been violated, which includes the pre-procedural proceedings carried out by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and this requires, in its opinion, an investigation that can only be adequately addressed through the timely investigation of the case.”
“It must be investigated,” the order clarifies, “if the criminally permitted limit has been exceeded in the area of ??the right to information that assists the Public Ministry as these are criminal proceedings, and therefore reserved, and likewise to what extent they have the constitutionally recognized rights of the complainant could have been harmed”.
