The investigator in the case opened to the State Attorney General at the Supreme Court deduces testimony from the leak of a UCO report | CGPJ | Judiciary | Supreme Court

by time news

The magistrate of the Criminal Chamber Ángel Hurtado, teacher of the case against the Attorney General of the State and the Chief prosecutor of the Province of Madrid for an alleged crime of revealing secrets, has issued an order with which he undertakes to deduce the testimonies and to send to the ‍deanery of‌ the courts of Madrid,⁢ for the appropriate purposes, the complaints of Álvaro García Ortiz and Pilar Rodríguez⁤ regarding the ​leak of the Unit’s expert report Central Operations​ (UCO) of⁣ 21 November. In the same sentence he also agreed to the sending of his order of 25 November with the warnings⁣ contained therein regarding the‌ secrecy of⁣ the proceedings.

The same decision was made by⁤ the instructor regarding a complaint filed by the public prosecutor, defender of Alberto ⁣GA, again for leaks of information.⁢

In his ruling, he responds to García Ortiz’s request ⁢to order the ⁣UCO to ‌give instructions so that private messages unrelated⁤ to ​the facts⁣ are not included in his ‍report.In this regard, he underlines that it makes no sense to accept this request since it is believed that “no reproach can be made against the work carried out by a unit as specialized and recognized as the Central Operational Unit of the Civil Guard, without prejudice to the right of the party to be questioned by you”.

The‍ investigator issued​ another order with‍ which⁢ he rejects the⁢ complaint of the ⁤State Prosecutor’s Office,⁢ on behalf of ⁣the two ‌suspects, for irregularities and omissions in the ‍UCO report of 21 November, as well as for violation​ of fundamental rights, and in which they are formulated various requests. The magistrate believes that “there is no room to⁣ criticize said expert opinion, carried out by a specialized unit⁤ such as the‌ UCO, without prejudice to the questioning of the party”.

-⁢ What are the potential consequences of secrecy violations in legal proceedings?

Interview: Legal Insights on ‍Recent developments in Secrecy Violations

Editor at Time.news: Thank you‌ for joining us today. ⁤We appreciate your expertise in legal matters,particularly regarding the recent⁤ ruling by Magistrate Ángel hurtado⁣ concerning alleged​ leaks in a ⁢high-profile⁣ case. Can you summarize the key aspects of this case for our ⁢readers?

Legal Expert: Thank you‌ for having me. The ‌case revolves⁢ around ​the complaints ⁢filed by Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz and Chief Prosecutor Pilar Rodríguez,​ who are alleging a violation of secrecy concerning a report⁢ from⁣ the Central Operations‍ Unit (UCO) dated November 21. Magistrate Hurtado has ‌decided to deduce ​these testimonies and forward​ the complaints to the courts in Madrid. This situation raises important concerns ‌about data‍ integrity and confidentiality in legal proceedings.

editor: ‍What implications does this ruling have ⁤for the individuals involved, particularly ⁤regarding the UCO and its expert reports?

Legal Expert: The implications are meaningful. Magistrate Hurtado has reinforced confidence ⁢in the UCO, indicating⁣ that ⁤the expert opinion delivered ​by this​ specialized unit cannot be easily undermined. He⁤ dismissed complaints regarding irregularities in ‍the ‌UCO’s report, stressing that its credibility remains⁤ intact, which is crucial for the⁤ prosecution‍ and defense alike. This decision may set a precedent ‌for how similar⁢ cases involving alleged leaks are treated moving forward.

Editor: ⁤ How do you ⁣interpret the magistrate’s refusal to accept the request to ‍limit what information ⁢the UCO can include in their​ reports?

Legal Expert: This refusal signals a strong defense of the ⁢UCO’s methodologies. The magistrate noted⁤ that it would be​ inappropriate to criticize a unit with such broad ⁤expertise without substantial grounds. This highlights the importance of relying on specialized⁤ investigations and the need for evidence-based critiques rather than subjective opinions.It also⁣ suggests that parties ⁣should focus on substantial legal arguments rather ⁣than attempting to circumvent protocol.

Editor: Given the complexities surrounding secrecy in legal proceedings,​ what practical advice would you offer to those in the legal‍ field?

Legal Expert: It’s vital for legal professionals to maintain rigorous standards regarding ​confidentiality. They should ensure that sensitive ‌data is handled with⁤ the utmost care and that all parties involved are fully aware‍ of the legal ramifications‌ of disclosure. Further, continuous training‍ on the importance of data ⁣privacy‍ and understanding legal precedents can better prepare ⁢professionals to navigate such ⁢sensitive issues.

Editor: how should the public and ⁢legal ⁢community⁣ interpret the ‍magistrate’s ⁤reaffirmation of⁣ fundamental rights considering​ these proceedings?

Legal Expert: The magistrate’s ruling reinforces the importance of safeguarding fundamental rights, which is ​essential in any judicial​ process. It is a reminder that while the legal system must​ operate efficiently, it must also honor the rights of individuals involved. This balance is critical for⁤ maintaining public trust in the justice‍ system,and the rulings‍ such as Magistrate Hurtado’s form‍ the ​backbone of that integrity.

editor: Thank you ⁢for your insights. This case certainly sheds light on the⁤ challenges and responsibilities of maintaining confidentiality in the legal system.

Legal⁢ Expert: My pleasure. ‌It’s⁣ an critically important ‍discussion, and I ⁤hope it‌ fosters‌ further dialog on ​the subject in the legal community.

You may also like

Leave a Comment