# Clarification Decree — Governmental File 112/2026 - Evidence ID: `EVID-2026-FISCALIA-EG112-ACLARACION-003` - Source date: 23 August 2026 - Notification date: 25 August 2026 - Signatory: Jaime Serrano-Jover González — Chief Prosecutor of the Canary Islands - Proceeding: Governmental File No. 112/2026 - Source pages: 3 - Source language: Spanish - Status: complete, page-accounted English translation of the public-safe official PDF derivative - Redactions in the controlling Spanish PDF: institutional contact details and the electronic-signature/DNI block only > Editorial note: this is an informational translation, not a certified translation. Page divisions follow the controlling Spanish PDF. Obvious syntax defects are rendered for sense without silently changing the decision's substance; the Spanish PDF controls. ## Page 1 of 3 CHIEF PROSECUTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE OF THE AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITY OF THE CANARY ISLANDS Governmental File No. 112/2026 DECREE Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 23 August 2026. **FIRST.** On 2 August 2026, this Superior Public Prosecutor's Office received a communication sent by email by Mr Gil Marer, by means of which he brought to the attention of the Public Prosecution Service a submission concerning certain actions requested of this Office in connection with various proceedings identified in the submission itself, which are deemed reproduced here. **SECOND.** As a result of this communication, the corresponding Governmental File, number 112/2026, was opened. Within it, the various documents accompanying the initial submission and the request made by Mr Gil Marer were analysed. It was decided to close that Governmental File because no indications of the commission of criminal acts were identified, nor did the content and examination of that submission and its annexed documents disclose any action that the Superior Public Prosecutor's Office was required to take. **THIRD.** On 20 August 2026, after due notification of the Decree deciding the matter set out in the preceding paragraph, the applicant sent a new email expressing opposition to the content of the Public Prosecutor's Decree because he disagreed with certain assessments in the referenced text, and also requested clarification of certain assessments in the original Decree. **FOURTH.** The applicant considers incongruent the Public Prosecutor's assessment that no persons subject to privileged jurisdiction are affected by the various reported actions, because there is a precedent linked to the facts brought to its attention in the original email, arising from Procedural Investigation Proceedings No. 2/2026. Those proceedings were opened precisely to assess possible criminal responsibility of the magistrate involved in the proceeding from which the divergences or irregularities reported by the applicant arose. Mr Marer is not wrong in stating that a criminal investigation proceeding was opened at this Public Prosecutor's Office following the complaint 1 CONTACT DETAILS OMITTED FROM THE PUBLIC COPY ## Page 2 of 3 CHIEF PROSECUTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE OF THE AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITY OF THE CANARY ISLANDS for an alleged offence of judicial prevarication lodged by the present applicant. Those proceedings, it should be noted, ended in provisional closure for lack of rational indications of criminality. Nevertheless, it should be clarified that neither the new email of 2 August nor the email of 20 August attributes any criminal irregularity to the magistrate in the same or similar terms as those which led at the time to the opening of the investigation proceedings. It is therefore considered that no persons subject to privileged jurisdiction are implicated in these new communications, with the result that this Superior Public Prosecutor's Office lacks subject-matter competence. That is the meaning of the assessment made by this Office and from which Mr Marer's doubts arise or appear to arise. The Public Prosecutor's Office has sought to explain that it is not appropriate to open new investigation proceedings because no new facts affecting the same person are reported, nor is there any enlargement of the original facts strengthening the indications that weighed against the magistrate initially reported. The matter is therefore determined through a file of this nature, without the need to open a new criminal investigation proceeding or reopen DIP 2/2026. As regards review of the proceeding or proceedings in which the applicant's private interests are being determined—which is the true object of these communications, since the reported irregularities concern those proceedings (that is, proceedings of a civil/mercantile nature)—our Decree dated 20 August already stated that it is not legally viable for this Superior Public Prosecutor's Office to carry out such a review. We have neither subject-matter nor territorial competence; territorial competence would concern the Provincial Public Prosecutor's Office of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. The possibility remains of applying directly to the appropriate bodies dealing with the specific proceeding so that they may review the acts considered unlawful or contrary to the legal order, using the appropriate challenge mechanisms forming part of the right to effective judicial protection. In view of the foregoing, **IT IS DECIDED** to clarify the content of the Decree dated 20 August 2026 in accordance with the preceding paragraphs, while maintaining the effect of the decision in full. Notify the complainant of receipt of the email and of its transmission, informing him that no appeal lies against this Decree pursuant to Article 112 of Law 39/2015 of 1 October on the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations and Article 124 of the Spanish Constitution. I so decide and sign by this Decree. 2 CONTACT DETAILS OMITTED FROM THE PUBLIC COPY ## Page 3 of 3 CHIEF PROSECUTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE OF THE AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITY OF THE CANARY ISLANDS Signed: The Chief Prosecutor. 3 CONTACT DETAILS OMITTED FROM THE PUBLIC COPY SIGNATURE AND CERTIFICATE DATA OMITTED FROM THE PUBLIC COPY