Sánchez's brother and the debate on 'lawfare'

It is well known that Sánchez (Pedro) likes everything, and chance – and the boots of Oyarzabal and Porro – have favored that on the day the print press has to report on his brother's conviction, the front pages give generous space to the victory of the Spanish national team. A first observation, looking at the headlines, is that the vast majority have "Sánchez's brother" as the subject. El Mundo goes a bit further and is offensive, titling "Sánchez's plugged-in brother." Only Abc headlines without the relationship: "David Sánchez, convicted of malfeasance." It seems like an innocent headline, but it has intent and cunning. It's about selling the idea that justice has operated normally and therefore the name of the person caught in the wrong is stated plainly. This false asepsis hides the fallacy: from the moment it has not been proven that Sánchez (David) obtained his position through machinations by Sánchez (Pedro), all this fuss over a case that everyone knows a good handful of, if they've barely left home, is unusual. The judges let the word nepotism slip in an ornamental place in the sentence for the friendly press to pick up, but in their reasoning, they admit they couldn't prove influence peddling.

Meanwhile, El País tries to build a containment wall with an editorial saying that the case had been "unusual and disproportionate," considers the sentence "more based on indications than on proof," and regrets that the criminal route was chosen instead of the administrative contentious one. Public procurement often exudes the stench of dishonorable arrangements to give a semblance of free competition to what is actually a very digital designation. But the arbitrary judicial and media use of this gives off another complementary stench. And both combined communicate to the pituitary gland an accurate portrait of the Spanish political, judicial, and media system.