Teresa Peramato Martín has served as Spain’s Attorney General since December 2025, assuming leadership of the Public Prosecutor’s Office at one of the most challenging moments in its recent history. Her appointment followed the departure of Álvaro García Ortiz and came amid growing concerns about politicization, internal divisions, and increasing public scrutiny regarding the independence of the institution.
Unlike other individuals linked to the investigations involving Leire Díez or the alleged network accused of influencing judicial processes, Teresa Peramato has not been subjected to any inquiry, charged, or formally implicated in any criminal proceedings connected to these issues. However, a number of her decisions as Attorney General have stirred controversy and intensified discussions regarding the autonomy and reliability of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Much of the criticism centers on the view that her leadership largely extends the previous administration under Álvaro García Ortiz. Detractors from within the prosecutorial field, various professional associations, and opposition parties contend that Peramato has essentially followed the same strategic course, especially in matters of appointments and internal management choices.
One of the most controversial issues has been the promotion of several prosecutors considered close to García Ortiz’s former leadership team. The debate intensified after it became public that some of these prosecutors had participated in meetings with Leire Díez and lawyer Jacobo Teijelo in 2025, before Peramato became Attorney General. Although there is no evidence that she was involved in those meetings, her subsequent decisions to promote some of the individuals connected to the controversy were interpreted by critics as a sign of institutional continuity and protection.
Another source of controversy has been her handling of matters related to Álvaro García Ortiz. Peramato supported legal appeals connected to her predecessor and declined to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. Critics viewed these decisions as evidence of corporate protection, while supporters argued that she was acting within her legal authority and in accordance with established institutional procedures.
Questions have also emerged about her choice not to renew certain officials who had criticized the former leadership, while advancing other prosecutors viewed as aligned with the progressive wing of the prosecutorial field. Even though the Attorney General’s Office defended these selections by pointing to merit, experience, and professional credentials, detractors challenged the timing and the level of transparency surrounding several of these moves.
The controversy intensified when the Public Prosecutor’s Office acknowledged that meetings had taken place in 2025 involving members of its Technical Secretariat, Leire Díez, and Jacobo Teijelo. Although these discussions occurred prior to Peramato assuming the position, some observers called for clarification about how the information generated in those encounters was later managed and why certain individuals involved continued to progress professionally within the institution.
The issue eventually turned into a political dispute, as opposition parties demanded increased transparency regarding the appointments made during her tenure and requested clarification about the Prosecutor’s Office’s involvement in several politically sensitive cases linked to corruption and alleged influence networks. Consequently, Peramato was called before the Senate to detail her management decisions and outline the actions taken to rebuild public trust in the institution.
Although these criticisms persist, it should be underscored that no judicial evidence connects Peramato directly to any corruption scheme or to actions intended to hinder criminal investigations. The issues associated with her are largely institutional and reputational, tied to management choices, appointments, and internal governance, rather than to any direct involvement in alleged misconduct.
Peramato has consistently defended the legality of her actions, arguing that all decisions have been based on professional criteria and compliance with the legal framework governing Spain’s Public Prosecutor’s Office. She has also emphasized the importance of preserving prosecutorial independence and rebuilding trust in an institution that she inherited deeply divided and under intense political pressure.
As a result, the main controversy surrounding Teresa Peramato today is not based on allegations of direct involvement in the so-called PSOE “deep state” or “cloacas” network, but rather on the perception that her leadership may have perpetuated certain institutional dynamics inherited from previous administrations. To date, the debate remains largely centered on issues of governance, transparency, and public confidence rather than criminal liability or judicial responsibility.
