A major conflict has erupted once again within the Spanish judicial system, drawing attention not only from legal professionals but also the general public. Alberto González Amador, known as the partner of Madrid president Isabel Díaz Ayuso, has formally filed an appeal against the decision of current Attorney General Teresa Péramato. At the heart of the dispute is the reinstatement of former prosecutor general Álvaro García Ortiz to his duties in the Supreme Court after he was suspended for two years following a conviction for leaking confidential information.
In December last year, Teresa Péramato signed an order granting García Ortiz the right to resume his post in the Social Affairs Section of the Supreme Court. The document emphasized that the court-imposed disqualification applied solely to the position of Attorney General and did not affect his standing within the prosecutor’s office itself. This decision sparked mixed reactions among lawyers and politicians, and has now become the subject of an official appeal.
The appeal and its arguments
González Amador, acting through his lawyer Gabriel Rodríguez Ramos, demands that García Ortiz be declared unfit to perform any prosecutorial duties. The appeal argues that reinstating an official convicted of leaking secrets to such a high position could undermine confidence in the judicial system and set a dangerous precedent for future decisions.
Legal circles remain divided: some argue that, strictly speaking, Peramato did not break the law, while others insist that such practices are unacceptable in a country with well-established democratic institutions. The question of what is permissible for representatives of the prosecution has once again become a focal point of public debate.
Reaction and consequences
The decision to reinstate García Ortiz has already sparked debate among professionals and politicians. Some experts warn that such measures could undermine the prosecutor’s office and increase mistrust of the justice system. Meanwhile, Peramato’s supporters emphasize that the law does not require automatic dismissal from the profession for such violations unless a lifetime disqualification is imposed.
Behind the scenes at the Supreme Court and among prosecutor’s office staff, the potential consequences of this precedent are being discussed. It is likely that similar controversies will soon arise in other cases related to the disciplinary responsibility of high-ranking officials.
Internal disagreements
The situation is further complicated by the fact that Peramato’s decision was made after the Prosecutor’s Office Inspection conducted a thorough review of the case. Following the review, it was concluded that despite the severity of the accusations, there were no grounds to completely bar García Ortiz from the profession. However, critics argue that this stance may be seen as an attempt to shield insiders, fueling further discontent in society.
Spain’s legal community remains locked in heated debate over the ethics and legality of a convicted prosecutor returning to official duties. Some argue that such decisions erode trust in government institutions, while others insist that the law must be applied strictly as written, regardless of public opinion.
Political context
The political dimension is also playing a significant role in the unfolding conflict. Alberto González Amador has long been associated with sharp criticism of the judicial system, and his partnership with Madrid’s leader has drawn even greater attention to the case. At the same time, the return of García Ortiz, who previously held a key post in the prosecutor’s office, is seen as a challenge to the opposition and a new reason for criticism of the current authorities.
In the coming weeks, the situation is expected to develop further. Legal proceedings could drag on, while public outcry may only intensify. The issue of whether convicted officials should be allowed to return to public service has once again taken center stage across the country.
