Fiscal Association Accuses Critics of Undermining Trust in the Prosecutor's Office. A conflict has erupted in Spain over staffing decisions made by Teresa Peramato. The Association of Progressive Prosecutors has accused opponents of trying to discredit the institution. Critics, in turn, speak of an "evacuation plan" and alleged bias.
A sharp conflict has erupted in Spain over new appointments in the Prosecutor General's Office. After Teresa Peramato completed the overhaul of the leadership team, the Association of Progressive Prosecutors (UPF) publicly accused its opponents of systematically attempting to undermine the legitimacy of the institution. According to the UPF, criticism of recent decisions goes beyond professional debate and damages the reputation of the entire structure.
On February 27, Teresa Peramato carried out a series of discretionary appointments for the first time, selecting several former associates of her predecessor, Álvaro García Ortiz, for her team. Among them were Ana García León and Diego Villafañe. At the same time, prosecutors linked to the Catalan process case, such as Consuelo Madrigal and Jaime Moreno, were not promoted. This move marked the beginning of a large-scale restructuring of key departments, including the Technical Secretariat—a body traditionally formed from trusted associates of the agency head.
Criticism and accusations
After completing the personnel overhaul, Peramato appointed Isabel Martín as head of the Madrid prosecutor's office, replacing Almudena Lastra, who was hoping for an extension of her mandate. At the same time, decisions were made regarding other key figures: Julián Salto was denied a permanent position with the National Court, and Pilar Rodríguez, previously head of the Madrid prosecutor's office, was given a seat in the Supreme Court. In the Galicia prosecutor's office, Pilar Fernández, the wife of García Ortiz, became deputy chief.
The Association of Prosecutors (AF), the largest in the professional community, saw these personnel changes as an “evacuation plan”—in their view, this was a deliberate move to transfer loyal employees to safe positions. AF paid particular attention to Almudena Lastra, noting that while her professional reputation was unimpeachable, she had publicly disagreed with the official stance on the García Ortiz case. Regarding Pilar Rodríguez, who had previously been involved in the case along with the former attorney general but was acquitted by the Supreme Court, AF stated that she lacks sufficient experience to work in the court’s social section.
Response of the Progressive Prosecutors
In response to the accusations, UPF emphasized that criticism is valid only if professional standards are observed and respect for the institution is maintained. In their opinion, widespread labeling such as “purge” or “arbitrariness” is not only unsupported by facts but also undermines trust in the prosecution service and its staff. UPF insists: all candidates who participated in the competition have sufficient merit, and it is the management’s responsibility to determine which of them is best suited for a specific position.
The association also noted that experience working in the central bodies of the prosecutor's office, such as the Technical Secretariat, has always been regarded as an important advantage. According to the UPF, attempts to devalue this experience distort the real picture and do not align with the traditions of the institution. The statement emphasizes that if any decision not matching the expectations of a particular group is immediately declared illegitimate, this creates a false perception of the prosecutor's office's work and undermines its authority.
Political background and consequences
Criticism of the new appointments also came from the People's Party, where the reshuffle was called an 'internal purge' following the conviction of García Ortiz. The UPF believes that such statements, especially from professional colleagues, only deepen distrust and damage the image of the prosecutor's office. The association underscores that work experience is important, but not the only criterion; when selecting leadership, management skills, technical competence, and alignment with the specific department’s objectives are also taken into account.
Questions about the legitimacy of decisions in the Spanish prosecutor's office have arisen before. For example, the European Parliament recently discussed lifting the immunity of a deputy accused of harassing a prosecutor from Valencia—more details on this are available in the article on the European Parliament's decision in the Alvise Pérez case.
