UCO Agents Confirm García Ortiz's 'Prominent Role' in Data Leak Case at Supreme Court

UCO agents from the Civil Guard, who drafted the key report in the case investigating the Attorney General of Spain, Álvaro García Ortiz, attributing him a 'prominent role' in the alleged leak against Alberto González Amador, the boyfriend of Madrid's president, Isabel Díaz Ayuso, have confirmed their conclusions.

The agents were summoned this Friday at 10:30 am to testify as experts at the Supreme Court (SC), at the request of the State Attorney's Office, defending García Ortiz and the other accused, the Chief Prosecutor of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez, to challenge the conclusion. However, according to legal sources, the agents merely confirmed their report.

Sources indicate that the testimony lasted about an hour due to questions from the defense, who, in line with the document requesting this diligence, argued that the UCO's conclusions in that report have no basis.

This is the report that the Armed Institute presented to the high court after analyzing the contents of the mobile phone seized from Rodríguez during the search conducted in her office on October 30, by order of Judge Ángel Hurtado.

The instructor summoned the experts after the Appeals Chamber partially upheld an appeal by the Attorney General, requesting a series of diligences, including the statement of González Amador himself, which the judges also supported and is scheduled for May 23.

García Ortiz requested that the agents who prepared that report appear to confirm or not its content and make the necessary clarifications at the request of the parties, especially the defense. Hurtado rejected it 'because, if it is a matter of confirmation, it adds nothing to the report itself' and, 'as for clarification, it is a matter that corresponds, if necessary, to the oral trial.'

However, the Appeals Chamber reminded that the law 'allows the judge, on his own initiative, or at the request of the parties' defenders, as in this case, to ask the experts for the necessary clarifications,' both in the investigation phase and in the trial, so it admitted the diligence, after which Hurtado set a date.

It should be remembered that this report is fundamental in the investigation that the Supreme Court is conducting against the two prosecutors for the alleged revelation of secrets committed against González Amador in three events: firstly, the alleged leak to the press that he was being investigated for tax crimes; and secondly, the email of February 2, 2024, where the businessman's defense offered to acknowledge them to reach an agreement with the case prosecutor, Julián Salto.

Hurtado is also investigating the press release issued by the Prosecutor's Office on March 14, 2024, reporting the exchange of emails between the defense and Salto to refute what the Public Prosecutor considered a 'hoax,' referring to the news published at 9:29 pm on March 13, 2024, by 'El Mundo,' stating that it was the prosecutor who offered to settle with González Amador.

RODRÍGUEZ'S MESSAGES

The report in question provides a chronological account of 'all communications' of Rodríguez with 'other members of the Prosecutor's Office regarding the investigated events' after adhering to the deadline set by the instructor, from March 8 to 14, 2024.

The UCO concluded that 'from 9:59 pm, when the Attorney General receives an email that requires and contains the one that is eventually leaked, and until the leak is published at 11:51 pm, there are only a very small number of people' who have access to 'all emails between the Prosecutor's Office and the defense lawyer' and who are aware, not only that the Public Prosecutor is drafting a 'statement,' but also of the 'approximate time period in which it will be published.'

Specifically, the agents emphasized that 'these two circumstances only initially occur in the Prosecutor's Office, so the leak must originate there and, within it, can be confined to the Attorney General's Office, the provincial chief prosecutor, the superior prosecutor, the dean prosecutor of economic crimes, and the economic crimes prosecutor.'

In this context, they pointed out that 'the initiative and direction in the action of drafting the press release and, in its context, the requirement of the different emails, is sustained by the Attorney General, who directly issues the orders to carry out the intended response to the information published in the press by the newspaper 'El Mundo'.'

Furthermore, they asserted that 'the person who leaks the information is aware at the time of doing so that, although the note is being drafted by the Attorney General's Office, the channel through which it will be made public will be the Madrid Prosecutor's Office.'

The messages also show that that night Rodríguez asked García Ortiz to which email she should send the emails exchanged between Salto and González Amador's defense. The Attorney General gave her a Gmail account, to which she sent them when she, in turn, received them from Salto himself.

In addition to referencing the March 14 press release and the email leaks mentioned, the agents included in their report the leak to the press of the complaint filed by the Public Prosecutor against González Amador for tax crimes.

The UCO pointed to the Prosecutor's Office as responsible for this leak and emphasized that the news about this complaint was published in the press on March 12, 'that is, only four days after' the Attorney General's Office received it 'completely' from the Provincial Prosecutor's Office of Madrid.

This report gained greater importance after the Supreme Court found that it could not know the contents of the Attorney General's mobile phone because, according to the UCO, García Ortiz deleted them, also erasing the Gmail account. The judge tried to recover this information through WhatsApp and Google but received data of no interest to the case.