The General Council of the Judiciary argues, to declare Álvaro García unsuitable as Attorney General of the State, for having used his position in a “spurious” manner this last year that he had already occupied the position.
This is established in the report issued by the body of judges thanks to the majority of the conservative bloc and with the progressive bloc against. By eight votes in favor to seven, the Council explains that García should not repeat the position after the Supreme Court has determined in a ruling that he exercised a “diversion of power” by appointing Dolores Delgado – his predecessor in office – Prosecutor of the Supreme Court Chamber.
“The proposed candidate had no qualms about appointing as Chamber Prosecutor a person with whom there was, at least, a tacit agreement of ‘do ut des’ and this is stated in the ruling: ‘there are good reasons to affirm that between the current state attorney general and Delgado there existed, previously, a close relationship of trust and that he had reasons to recognize her,” the report states.
“It does not seem that anyone who makes such spurious use of the important powers conferred on the FGE can be considered suitable for appointment,” states the mandatory but non-binding document.
For the signatory members, García has “clearly” violated the law and “that cannot be inconsequential for the person who adopted a decision of such heavy judicial reproaches.”
The report, issued for the first time in an unfavorable manner to a candidate, warns that it does not seem that the appointment of a candidate “who has demonstrated such deficient care in the neatness of the performance of the positions of the Prosecutor’s Office of more than relevant significance”.
The members also put on the table the appointment policy of the attorney general in favor of prosecutors who come from their same association, the Progressive Union of Prosecutors (UPF). It states that of the 33 discretionary appointments assigned this last year, 22 of them have been in members of the program associated with the UPF, which has 200 associates of the 2,700 total of the program (7.4%), which which means that it represents 66.6% of discretionary positions.
Five have been from the conservative Association of Prosecutors, which has 630 associates (that is, 23% of the career) and accounts for 15% of the discretionary positions. And 4 to non-members, which are the highest percentage of the race (970), which means having designated only 12% of those who represent 40%.
“To conclude from these magnitudes that the members of a specific minority association have that degree of excellence and that those who do not belong to any association deserve ostracism to access the judicial leadership requires a very reinforced justification that has never been done,” adds the report.
Another reason why the Council believes that García cannot be re-elected attorney general is due to the lack of support he has provided to the prosecutors linked to the process, who have suffered the “most outrageous public ridicule that could be imagined and unknown in our entire judicial history”, among other things accused of “lawfare”.
“Given this situation and the FGE being the only one that can and should react to such an unworthy smear campaign, the proposed candidate’s actions have been, not only the most absolute inactivity, but, in his public appearances, due to his attitudes, he has evidenced a harmony with those who were the promoters of such campaigns, offering the more than suspicious risk that said inaction is not based on sharing such serious accusations of the actions of the Prosecutor’s Office,” he concludes.