The provisional data of the elections to the Fiscal Council outline a body in which the majority and conservative association, the Prosecutors Associationhas increased its majority with six vowels for the two obtained by the Progressive Union of Prosecutors and the member who gets, for the first time in its history, the Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors.
A Supreme Court prosecutor criticizes the "lack of institutional loyalty" of his colleagues for requesting the withdrawal of a PSOE amendment
These are provisional results offered by different sources in the absence of knowing the final results that will be known tomorrow with the specific votes that each candidate has obtained. In the last elections to the Fiscal Council, the successive recounts changed the composition of the Council with the Association of Prosecutors losing counselor José Ortiz and the Progressive Union of Prosecutors winning Dolores Delgado, at that time coordinator against jihadist terrorism in the National Court.
If the result does not change, the Association of Prosecutors gains a member with respect to the previous mandate, the Progressive Union of Prosecutors loses one and the APIF enters the Council. In the case of APIF, it obtains representation for the first time with Salvador Viada, prosecutor of the Supreme Court. Except for later counts, this is the new composition of the Fiscal Council:
Jorge Andújar (AF) Eva Más (AF) Isabel Gómez (AF) Roberto Valverde (AF) Miguel Rodríguez (AF) Beatriz Sánchez (AF) Yolanda Ortiz (UPF) Santiago Mena (UPF) Salvador Viada (APIF)
The majority Association of Prosecutors had presented six candidates: the anti-corruption prosecutor Jorge Andújar, the computer crime prosecutor Roberto Valverde and the provincial prosecutors Miguel Rodríguez, Isabel Gómez, Eva Más and Beatriz Sánchez. The Progressive Union of Prosecutors, for its part, presented Alexandra García, Santiago Mena, Francisco Montijano, Yolanda Ortiz, Luis del Río and Belén Marín. Finally, the Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors sought their entry into the body with the prosecutor for sexist violence Silvia López, the Anticorruption prosecutor Teresa Gálvez and Salvador Viada. The latter is the current president of the association and prosecutor of the Supreme Court.
A convulsive mandate
The Fiscal Council was renewed for the last time in the first quarter of 2018. Elections that left a Council with five prosecutors from the Prosecutors Association and four of the Progressive Union of Prosecutorsgiving way to a convulsive mandate with conflicts that have reached the Supreme Court.
The Association of Prosecutors has focused its criticism on Delgado's appointment policy, pointing above all to those appointments of prosecutors belonging to the UPF, an association of which the attorney general is a member. Since the appointment of John Ignatius Fields as Lieutenant Prosecutor of the Supreme Court - in which abstained - but also openly criticizing, for example, the management of the case of Ignacio Stampaone of the prosecutors in the Villarejo case, and calling for his resignation.
This association has also addressed the European Commissioner for Justice, Didier Reynders, to criticize the reform of the Fiscal Statute so that the attorney general is promoted to room prosecutor when she leaves the post. From the Progressive Union of Prosecutors, however, they consider that the AF defends in court positions contrary to those they put on the table of the Fiscal Council and that its objective is to "undermine" the attorney general and the Council itself.
Recently the Supreme Court has annulled one of these appointments. That of Eduardo Esteban as room prosecutor and delegate for minors in March 2021 against the candidate of the Association of Prosecutors, José Miguel de la Rosa, after estimating an appeal by the candidate and another by the association in two different sentences.
The Supreme Court forces Delgado to repeat the appointment but in a motivated manner in a harsh resolution: “There is a difference between the two applicants that is so striking that it makes the reasons deduced by the State Attorney General in its proposal on the capacity of the appointee decline, since He does not reason why he considers that, despite such manifest differences, even so, Mr. Eduardo Esteban Rincón is more suitable for that specialized position.”