The Constitutional rejects Victoria Rosell's appeal for the investigation to which the Prosecutor's Office submitted her

Judge Victoria Rosell, current Government delegate for Gender Violence, at the Ministry of Equality, in March 2020. Jaime Villanueva

The Constitutional Court has denied protection to the judge on leave of absence Victoria Rosell, currently the Government delegate against Gender Violence, in relation to the investigation that she was subjected to by the Canary Islands Prosecutor's Office in 2015, when the magistrate was preparing his candidacy for the Cortes in the Podemos lists.

The reason for the denial is that the court of guarantees considers that Rosell has already received clear protection of her fundamental rights by the Supreme Court, which in 2017 considered that the Prosecutor's Office had limited powers to investigate possible disciplinary responsibilities of the magistrates.

The essential argument of the sentence -of which the vice-president of the court, Juan Antonio Xiol, has been rapporteur- is that when Rosell presented his request for protection "no longer persisted any type of constitutional injury".

The magistrate's claim was for the Constitutional Court to recognize that her rights had been violated by the investigation opened by the Las Palmas Prosecutor's Office against her.

These proceedings were related to the sale of a radio station owned by his partner, the journalist Carlos Sosa, to the businessman Miguel Ángel Ramírez, who in turn had an open case in the Rosell court.

The investigation began after receiving the Prosecutor's Office a documentation sent anonymously about that commercial operation.

The prosecutors began the investigations to verify if the magistrate had incurred in any improper action, for not having refrained from continuing with the procedure that she had in her court.

Later it was learned that the anonymous submission actually came from Judge Salvador Alba.

Alba was expelled from the judicial career on March 3 after being sentenced in 2021 by the Supreme Court to six years and six months in prison for conspiring against Rosell.

Rosell obtained a first favorable ruling from the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC), which in 2017 considered that the investigation to which he was subjected by the Prosecutor's Office had invaded "essential aspects of the disciplinary procedure", a matter that corresponds to the Council. General of the Judicial Power (CGPJ).

This first sentence meant the annulment of the pre-trial proceedings that the prosecutors of the Canary Islands had instructed.

That resolution was appealed to the Supreme Court, before which Rosell requested that it be recognized that the investigation by the Prosecutor's Office and its dissemination affected his political rights, since it coincided with his status as a member of the Podemos electoral candidacy.

The Contentious Chamber considered, however, that said violation had not existed, because, among other factors, the magistrate —then already in a situation of special services— managed to be elected deputy, in December 2015.

Rosell sought the further protection of the Constitutional Court, which has finally considered that in essence the judge has already achieved, from the ordinary jurisdiction, the desired protection.

The ruling of the court of guarantees affirms that the actions of the Las Palmas Prosecutor's Office "had been declared conclusively in the judicial process as radically null for violating their fundamental rights."

The Constitutional Court considers that said recognition was clear both in the first sentence, that of the Superior Court of the Canary Islands, and in that of the Supreme Court.

And the court of guarantees reasons that in the first "the lack of jurisdiction and the infringement of the principle of neutrality of the Public Prosecutor" was accepted in its investigation into Rosell, and, in the second,