The College of Law of Alcalá de Henares has considered "appropriate" the 38,508.26 euros set as attorney fees for the lawyer who brought the private prosecution on behalf of businessman Alberto González Amador in the case against former Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz, convicted of a crime of disclosure of reserved data.
This is stated in an opinion sent to the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, which Europa Press has accessed, and which has been incorporated into the cost assessment piece through an order diligence dated this Monday.
The college report concludes that the amount claimed by the lawyer is "appropriate" in light of the complexity of the procedure, the time invested, and the professional work developed. However, the college's criterion is subject to the judicial body considering the items included in the bill as due, without the opinion constituting a definitive resolution on the assessment.
The cost assessment procedure was opened once the Supreme Court convicted García Ortiz, in a ruling dated December 9, 2025, for a crime of disclosure of reserved data.
The ruling imposed a fine of twelve months with a daily quota of 20 euros, two years of special disqualification for the position of Attorney General, and the payment of the procedural costs incurred, including those of the private prosecution, excluding half of the remaining ones. In addition, it set compensation of 10,000 euros for moral damages.
Challenge and reduction of the initial bill
González Amador's lawyer initially submitted a bill for fees of 64,778.78 euros, excluding VAT, which rose to 78,382.32 euros once the tax was applied.
The Public Prosecutor's Office and the State Attorney's Office challenged the assessment, considering the claimed fees and rights to be "excessive" and "unjustified." In a decree dated March 26, 2026, the lawyer of the Administration of Justice partially upheld the challenge for undue items and set the total costs at 39,009.48 euros.
Subsequently, both the Public Prosecutor's Office and the State Attorney's Office appealed that decree, but the Supreme Court dismissed both appeals by order dated July 2, 2026, confirming the established amount.
After this pronouncement, the College of Law of Alcalá de Henares has reviewed again the bill of the lawyer and understands that the 38,508.26 euros corresponding to their fees, VAT included, are "adequate" for their inclusion in the appraisal, once the declared undue items have been clarified.
Institutional relevance and complexity of the case
In its opinion, the professional college highlights the special institutional relevance of a procedure aimed at clarifying the disclosure of reserved information by the person who held the highest representation of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The report also emphasizes the plurality of parties involved, the initial processing before the High Court of Justice of Madrid and its subsequent referral to the Supreme Court due to the special jurisdiction, as well as the opening of fifteen separate pieces to process appeals, the practice of numerous investigative diligences, and the intense contentious activity developed during the case. Among the diligences carried out are letters rogatory sent to Ireland and the United States.
González Amador exercised the private prosecution and even requested four years of imprisonment for García Ortiz, in addition to other penalties, and a compensation of 300,000 euros for moral damages. The Supreme Court's ruling ultimately reduced that compensation to 10,000 euros.
The opinion of the College of Law of Alcalá de Henares was issued on October 5 and subsequently received by the Supreme Court, which has incorporated it into the cost appraisal piece.