The State Attorney has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court's Appeals Chamber challenging Judge Ángel Hurtado's decision to maintain charges against Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz and Madrid Provincial Prosecutor Pilar Rodríguez.

Both officials are implicated in a case concerning the alleged disclosure of secrets related to the investigation of Alberto González Amador, partner of Isabel Díaz Ayuso, President of the Community of Madrid, who is accused of tax fraud and document forgery.

The appeal asserts that there is no direct evidence of the alleged disclosure of a February 2 email, in which González Amador admitted to two crimes and proposed a deal with the prosecution to avoid prison.

The Attorney's defense maintains that, after several months of investigations, Judge Hurtado has disregarded evidence that could exonerate both prosecutors.

On February 26, Judge Hurtado signed a ruling questioning the credibility of testimonies from journalists who claimed to have known the secret—González Amador's admission of guilt—prior to the receipt of information by the two charged officials.

These testimonies could potentially invalidate the case against García Ortiz and Rodríguez.

The appeal filed in defense of the provincial prosecutor highlights statements from five journalists across four different media outlets and seeks to summon three journalists from EL PAÍS, who demonstrated via WhatsApp messages that they were aware of the supposed secret 31 hours before the Attorney General received the documentation.

Supreme Court jurisprudence indicates that information ceases to be confidential or reserved once it is known to information professionals, thus allowing for its disclosure under Article 417 of the Penal Code.

The appeal aims to address the doubts raised by the investigating judge regarding the journalists’ accounts.

Regarding journalist Campos, who revealed information on Cadena SER, the appeal clarifies that while it was published at 23:51—the moment the judge claims the information circle was completed—earlier broadcasts on the radio had presented the contents of the email at 23:20. The judge's ruling did not account for Campos's prior call to the Attorney General at 21:38 to confirm the news, which went unanswered.

The defense questions the implications of this call in the context of the allegations, arguing that it is inconsistent for a journalist to contact someone they claim has leaked information before that person possesses it.

The appeal details that on March 20, 2025, multiple journalists from EL PAÍS reported through an article titled 'The Evidence of a Secret,' published at least 31 hours before the Attorney General's request, that sources from both the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor’s Office and the Superior Court of Justice informed them about a potential plea deal between González Amador and the prosecution.

The article claims that earlier that afternoon on March 12, 2024, three journalists from EL PAÍS learned that González Amador acknowledged the criminal acts attributed to him in order to reach a plea agreement, according to the Attorney’s submission.

The judge's ruling deemed the testimonies of these three journalists untrustworthy and failed to adequately consider the credibility and publications of other two media outlets that reported on the email in question.

The appeal also emphasizes a report from El Mundo on possible plea negotiations between the prosecution and González Amador at 21:29 on March 13, stating that although this report did not accurately reflect the circumstances, it disclosed that González Amador had admitted to various tax irregularities to the Treasury.

The source of the El Mundo report was reportedly González Amador himself, as suggested by Judge Hurtado, and the witness statement from the journalist involved indicated knowledge of the ongoing negotiations.

Furthermore, the State Attorney posits that González Amador willingly placed himself in a publicly known position, intentionally waiving confidentiality regarding specific data after sending an email on March 12 to a senior official in the Community of Madrid, who subsequently shared it with multiple reporters.

Additionally, González Amador's attorney sent a proposal for a plea deal alongside his confession not only to the prosecution but also to a State attorney, challenging the confidentiality attributed to the contents of the February 2 email.

The investigation into the exchanges between the prosecution and the defense attorney has been termed sensitive by Judge Hurtado, hinting that confidentiality breaks could impair the right to defense substantially.

The State Attorney counterargues that the information leaked to El Mundo by González Amador, as cited by the judge, included elements concerning the existence of plea negotiations, which are inherently linked to an acknowledgment of the accused's criminal responsibility.

The existence of these negotiations was already public before the Attorney General was made aware of the specific details of the disputed emails.