# Office of the Attorney General — Fiscal Inspection — E.G. 745/2026 **Controlled English translation of the notification and Decree** **Source document date:** 26 August 2026 **Notification email:** 26 August 2026 **Source:** `OFICIO Y DECRETO EXP. 745-26.pdf`, 3 pages **Native source SHA-256:** `1e09c8eb3bce26e28dc5f22e5d6ebad3f458212cf8d85f5920e869fa42554abe` > This is a convenience translation prepared for the controlled evidence record. It is not an official translation. The Spanish native source and controlled Spanish transcription prevail if there is any discrepancy. --- # PAGE 1 — NOTICE LETTER **OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** **FISCAL INSPECTION — Inspecting Prosecutor** **Our ref.:** IF/MCS **Subject:** E.G. 745/2026 **Addressee:** Mr Gil Marer **Sir:** Attached I send a copy of the Decree dated 26 August 2026 relating to the Government File referenced above, for the purposes of notification. Madrid, 26 August 2026 **Olalla Vázquez Moraga** *[The standard personal-data notice and contact block at the foot of the source page are omitted from this public translation.]* --- # PAGE 2 — DECREE **OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** **FISCAL INSPECTION — Chief Inspecting Prosecutor** **Ref.:** IF/MCS **E.G.:** 745/2026 ## DECREE On 3 August 2026, an email addressed to this unit and submitted by Mr Gil Marer was received by the Fiscal Inspection of the Office of the Attorney General, giving rise to the opening of the Government File referenced above. The submission requests “that an independent inspection review be ordered of the post-knowledge conduct of the Las Palmas Provincial Prosecution Office, without limiting it to requesting and reproducing the account of the same decision-making chain under examination”. An annex is added under the title “urgent request for cessation and mitigation of non-insolvency-related patrimonial damage”. The submission is drafted in a confusing and incoherent manner, without complying with Article 66.1 of Law 39/2015 of 1 October on the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations, paragraph (c) of which requires applications to contain the facts, reasons and request in which the application is stated with complete clarity. The principle of administrative efficiency (Article 103 of the Spanish Constitution) entails the need to avoid gratuitous or unnecessary actions. Therefore, an investigative action by the Fiscal Inspection should not be initiated, since such action is only to be undertaken when the terms and content of complaints or reports concerning dysfunctions in the functioning of the Public Prosecution Service or concerning possible responsibility of prosecutors provide sufficient information reasonably demonstrating the advisability of an investigation by showing minimum indications of plausibility (Supreme Court judgment of 23 December 2008, appeal 24/2006). This requirement is not met in the present case because no irregularity attributable to a specific prosecutor in a specific matter is identified. In accordance with the foregoing and, since the submission does not disclose sufficient data or elements to justify intervention by the Fiscal Inspection pursuant to Article 13 of the Regulations of the Public Prosecution Service, it is **ORDERED**: 1. To archive Government File 745/2026 of the Fiscal Inspection. 2. To notify the complainant of this Decree. --- # PAGE 3 — REVIEW ROUTES AND SIGNATURE Against this Decree, which brings the administrative route to an end in accordance with Article 114.1(c) of Law 39/2015 of 1 October on the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations (Article 13.2 of the Organic Statute of the Public Prosecution Service; Supreme Court judgment of 20 July 2015, cassation appeal 2099/2014; Fiscal Inspection Service Order of 24 September 2015), an optional administrative reconsideration appeal (`recurso potestativo de reposición`) may be lodged within one month, counted from the day following notification, before the Fiscal Inspection of the Office of the Attorney General (C/ Fortuny no. 4, Madrid 28010), under Article 123 and related provisions of that Law; or, alternatively, a contentious-administrative appeal may be lodged before the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, pursuant to Articles 12.1(b) and 14.1, rule 1, of Law 29/1998 of 13 July regulating the Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction, within two months counted from the day following notification, in accordance with Article 46 of that Law, if standing exists. Let the foregoing be carried out. Madrid, 26 August 2026 **THE CHIEF INSPECTING PROSECUTOR** **María José Osuna Cerezo** --- ## Translation-control notes - `expediente gubernativo` is rendered as “Government File” for consistency; this does not imply a separate judicial proceeding. - `recurso potestativo de reposición` is rendered descriptively as “optional administrative reconsideration appeal”, while preserving the Spanish procedural term. - `recurso contencioso-administrativo` is rendered as “contentious-administrative appeal”. - `Fiscalía` / `Ministerio Fiscal` terminology is rendered as Public Prosecution Service / Office of the Attorney General according to context. - This translation makes no finding on the correctness or lawfulness of the Decree.