The attorney general urges her team to dismantle the “serious accusations” of the ‘Stampa case’

The State Attorney General (FGE), Dolores Delgado, held last Monday, November 15, a meeting with his team, which he requested disposition to counteract what, according to judicial sources, he called the “lies & rdquor; of the prosecutor of the ‘Tándem-Villarejo case’, Ignacio Press. The attorney general denied Stampa a fixed position in the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office, a mechanism used to remove him from the investigation. Delgado has included this point in the agenda of the meeting of the Fiscal Council next November 24.

According to these sources, he participated in the meeting on Monday morning Pilar Rodriguez, chief prosecutor of the Provincial Court of Madrid, destination to which Stampa returned in November 2020, after expiring his commission of services in Anticorruption. The chief prosecutor of the Inspection, Maria Antonia Sáinz Gaite.

Delgado later made phone calls to the members of the Fiscal Council, an advisory body of the FGE, Aurelio Blanco (Progressive Union of Prosecutors) and Conception Heel (Association of Prosecutors). He wants the next meeting of the Fiscal Council to give a strong response on the ‘Press case’.

“Slander”

According to a communication from the FGE to the Fiscal Council, in possession of EL PERIÓDICO, Dolores Delgado points out that, in view of “the very serious and defamatory information Regarding the Fiscal Council, “I made the decision to add a specific point to the agenda of the Fiscal Council of November 24, in order to gather detailed information on this issue.”

This matter has regained relevance as a result of the questions registered on November 11 in the Fiscal Council, by the Criminal Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Salvador Viada, in turn president of the Independent Association of Prosecutors (APIF).

It was the Fiscal Council that signed Delgado’s proposal, on October 27, 2020, not to grant a fixed position of the eight vacancies to which Stampa aspired in the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office after promoting the ‘Tandem-Villarejo case’, which has begun to be prosecuted in the National Court.

Alleged irregularities

Viada’s questions, based on alleged irregularities of the actions of the State Attorney General, exposed and meticulously documented in a claim for patrimonial reparation presented by Stampa before the Ministry of Justice, inquire to what extent the Fiscal Council, which upheld the FGE’s decision, knew these details at the time to make a decision that resulted not only in deny you a fixed place, but also in separating him from the ‘Tándem-Villarejo case’.

These details refer, firstly, to the fact that the State Attorney General gave instructions to artificially keep investigative proceedings open in the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid only in relation to Stampa following a Anonymous complaint who accused him and the other prosecutor of the ‘Tándem-Villarejo case’, Miguel Serrano, having leaked the summary. In other words, the attorney general who promoted these proceedings was the one who, in turn, proposed to deny him the position.

And, secondly, the fact that the former judge Baltasar Garzón, a partner of the State Attorney General, defended, in his capacity as lawyer, one of the investigated, the former commissioner Enrique Garcia Castaño, and his firm did it with other investigated. Prosecutor Viada asks about this possible conflict of interest.

Judicial sources indicate that the “front & rdquor; of the prosecutors associations involved in the beheading of Stampa in the Fiscal Council of October 27, 2020 has begun to be challenged despite the attempt by the State Attorney General to obtain a joint response to Stampa.

Upset among prosecutors

In principle, last Monday the 15th the possibility of a joint communication between the Progressive Union of Prosecutors (UPF), one of the associations whose members are part of the Fiscal Council, and which obtained the election of Delgado as a member of said council in 2018, and the conservative Association of Prosecutors (AF), to which Stampa belonged, denying the facts.

This idea was rejected by the AF. Finally, the UPF, in line with the arguments, according to judicial sources, of the attorney general, points out to Viada’s questions that, “in no way, Ignacio Press was removed from the hearing of the preliminary proceedings of the investigating court number 6 of the National Court & rdquor ;, that is, the ‘Tándem-Villarejo case’.

“This colleague was serving as a prosecutor in Sevice commission until its expiration date … he presented his candidacy in the Plenary of the Fiscal Council on 10-27-2020 to obtain a place where he did not obtain any favorable report for it. As we all know, service commissions never ensure that the seats will be owned when they go out to tender & mldr; & rdquor ;.

The answer says not knowing the “specific questions & rdquor; about him ‘Tandem-Villarejo case’ in what would be an implicit reference to the activity of ex-judge Garzón because, he affirms “we lack the competence to do so & rdquor ;, Likewise,“ we do not know the content & rdquor; of the proceedings of the Prosecutor’s Office of the TSJ of Madrid “for being of reserved character and exceed our competition & rdquor ;.

“Media pressure”

For its part, this Tuesday 16, the Association of Prosecutors has issued a statement in which it indicates that the recent information on the ‘Stampa case’ constitutes “very serious accusations that require a very detailed response from the FGE itself in the Fiscal Council & rdquor ;.

Related news

The AF, which supported Delgado in removing Stampa for what described the existence of “a media pressure& rdquor ;, now attacks the attorney general for “her trajectory marked by the intentional ignorance of the Organic Statute of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Regulations, whose provisions have been systematically ignored & mldr; unfortunately the episode that is now known, but is part of a way of running the institution & rdquor ;.

For his part, Viada explains to this newspaper: “When they say that the prosecutor Stampa has not been removed from the ‘Tándem-Villarejo case’ they lack the truth. Because suppose, for dialectical purposes, that other applicants had more merits than he, in such a situation he could, by virtue of having promoted the investigation for four years from the beginning of it, have assigned that case based on article 26 of the Statute. In the interest of justice and the Prosecutor’s Office for their knowledge of the matter & rdquor ;.