A high-profile trial has begun in Spain’s capital, sending shockwaves through the top ranks of the prosecutor’s office. The country’s Attorney General is in the dock, and the courtroom is witnessing an intense showdown between officials from within the department. From the very first moments of the hearing, it became clear: this case will go beyond uncovering the facts—it will also expose deep rifts within the prosecutor’s office itself.
At the center of the case is a story about leaked emails connected to an investigation involving businessman Alberto González Amador, a partner of the prominent political figure Isabel Díaz Ayuso. These very emails triggered the accusations against the head of the prosecutor’s office. Even on the first day of the proceedings, it became obvious there was no unity among key officials: some insist the leadership was involved in the leak, while others categorically deny it.
The participants in the case do not conceal their personal animosities. From the outset, the head of Madrid’s prosecutor’s office suspected the Attorney General of organizing the leak, though was unable to explain exactly why these suspicions arose. Her position was challenged by colleagues who, on the contrary, backed the Attorney General’s actions and called them lawful. During the hearing, it was revealed that the decision to publish a press release denying rumors of negotiations between the prosecutor’s office and González Amador’s lawyer was made hastily and fueled internal disagreements. Some argued against rushing, while others pushed for immediate action.
Particular attention was drawn to the stance of the head of the Madrid prosecutor’s office, who claimed to have warned colleagues about the risk of a leak, although they deny this. As a result, when the information did leak to the press, a search for those responsible began, and suspicion fell on the Attorney General himself. Meanwhile, other officials pointed to a lack of coordination and transparency in keeping the public informed about the progress of the investigation.
Internal conflicts and new revelations
The legal proceedings uncovered not only disagreements over the leak itself but also raised questions about how the prosecutor’s office handles cases involving public figures. Some participants pointed out that in other instances, information about investigations into high-profile individuals appeared in the media before any formal charges were filed. This time, however, the case only became public after it was reported in the press, causing frustration among some prosecution staff.
During the hearings, it was revealed that information about a possible agreement between the prosecutor and González Amador’s lawyer surfaced a day before relevant letters appeared in the media. This was confirmed by several participants in the proceedings who had discussed the case details informally. It later emerged that the request to hand over all correspondence between the prosecutor and the lawyer was filed as an official order, and the prosecutor handling the case saw nothing unusual in this, considering it a routine tax violation case.
Accusations against the leadership and counterclaims
A key topic of discussion was the practice of informing the prosecutor’s office leadership about cases that attract public attention. The prosecution tried to question the need to escalate the González Amador case to higher authorities, but agency staff pointed out that similar procedures had been used before, including in other high-profile cases. Moreover, over the past year, similar reports were sent to management virtually every day.
At the conclusion of the hearings, both sides exchanged accusations of bias and personal animosity between the heads of different prosecutor’s office divisions. Some participants believe this conflict is both professional and personal, further complicating the high-profile case.
