Spain's Attorney General Receives Historic Two-Year Disqualification for Email Leak

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of Spain has sentenced Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz to two years of disqualification from his position due to the unlawful disclosure of confidential emails related to the tax fraud confession of Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner, thereby making him the first Attorney General in the country to be convicted. The court's decision entails a fine of €7,200 and a requirement to compensate Ayuso's partner with €10,000 for moral damages incurred from the leak. The conviction stems from an incident that was debated before the Supreme Court's Criminal Chamber on November 13, where a divided court voted on García Ortiz's culpability. While five judges favored a guilty verdict, two judges—Susana Polo and Ana Ferrer—opposed the conviction, marking a significant divide in the judiciary regarding the case's ethics and legality. The ruling has immediate implications for García Ortiz’s position. Although the disqualification will come into force once the legal notification is completed, he may choose to resign or face dismissal from his role before this occurs. Nonetheless, the Attorney General retains his position at present since the sentence is not yet finalized or legally enforced. The case raises additional questions about whether García Ortiz will retain his status as a prosecutor, given that the Prosecutors Regulations allow for disqualification due to criminal convictions. While he faces potential suspension, if the sentence does not exceed six months, the consequences of his conviction remain a topic of legal debate. Despite the finality of the Supreme Court’s ruling, García Ortiz retains the opportunity to challenge the verdict through legal appeals, starting with a nullity incident and potentially reaching the Constitutional Court. Legal analysts indicate that he is expected to pursue this course and seek justice through higher courts. Significantly, the dissenting opinions of the two progressive judges in the Criminal Chamber reflect ongoing tensions within Spain’s judiciary regarding cases of political sensitivity. Judges Polo and Ferrer have a history of addressing controversial cases and have reiterated their firm stance against the precedent set by the majority. García Ortiz’s conviction, rooted in Article 4171 of the Penal Code, identifies his actions as a grave breach of trust, given his authoritative access to confidential information. Though the imposed penalties are less severe than what was initially sought by the accusers, they mark a crucial juncture in the accountability of public officials in Spain, addressing the balance between the right to privacy and the necessity for transparency within governmental operations. As the legal processes unfold, Spain watches closely as the ramifications of this case ripple through the political and judicial spheres, underscoring the importance of upholding integrity in public office. Related Sources: • Source 1 • Source 2 • Source 3