Judge Peinado draws inspiration from the Trial ruling to link the Begoña Gómez case

Judge Juan Carlos Peinado is keeping his case against Begoña Gómez, the wife of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, alive. This Wednesday, the magistrate rejected the motion to dismiss the case and made another move: he has charged another official from the Moncloa Palace, the current Secretary General of the Presidency and former Director of the Department of Technical and Legal Coordination, Judit Alexandra González Pedraz. Peinado has summoned her to testify on November 12, at which time he will inform her of the charges against her and that she is being investigated for embezzlement. One aspect of this case is the hiring of Gómez's former advisor, Cristina Álvarez, for which the magistrate has also charged Álvarez herself, Begoña Gómez, and the Spanish government's delegate in Madrid, Francisco Martín Aguirre, who previously held a position in the Presidency. The judge's argument is that the hiring of this advisor, paid for with public funds, actually served to manage Begoña Gómez's private affairs. To justify this charge, in the ruling made public this Wednesday, the judge cites the judgment in the embezzlement case. Peinado explains that embezzlement is not only that defined in Article 432 of the Penal Code, which is also "the most common," and which refers to "appropriating, with the intent to profit, or allowing a third party to do so with the same intent, public assets under one's charge." He recalls that the judgment in the embezzlement case also invoked the possibility of "eventual misappropriation," that is, when public funds are managed in a "disloyal" manner. Peinado, in this regard, cites one of the excerpts from the judgment in the trial: "The crime of embezzlement of public funds, subject to a significant reform introduced by Organic Law 1/2015 of March 30, now punishes not only misappropriation or theft, but also the disloyal administration of public funds." In this sense, he recalls that other judgments have established that this type of embezzlement "condemns the conduct of the authority or public official in charge of public assets who, breaking the bonds of fidelity and loyalty incumbent upon them by virtue of their position and abusing the powers of their office, causes harm to the assets under their administration." Thus, he adds that this type of embezzlement includes actions such as "the improper assumption of obligations," which is what he believes occurred in the Begoña Gómez case. The Foreign Ministry example

Peinado cites as an example the conviction of Raül Romeva, then Minister of Foreign Affairs, for failing to comply with the Constitutional Court's orders and preventing "the use of public funds for the illegal referendum and, above all, the uncontrolled use of public resources for this same purpose." According to the judge, the ruling in the Catalan independence trial did not condemn "the normal operation of Diplocat"—which the Minister of Foreign Affairs controlled—nor the opening of delegations abroad, but rather "the blatant disloyalty of using public funds to cover the expenses incurred as a result of a referendum."

The judge, in this regard, recalls that jurisprudence derived from other rulings establishes: "The purpose of enrichment is not the only possible one for the commission of the crime of misappropriation. In particular, the crime of embezzlement clearly cannot be otherwise, because the criminal offense does not require the illicit use of public funds or similar assets."

Thus, Peinado uses the concept of making "unfair" use of public funds in the hiring of Begoña Gómez's advisor, considering that she exceeded her authority. "Any person who has the capacity to control the tasks performed by individuals hired or appointed to specific functions related to a public service, and who is aware of this because it is notorious and in the public domain, can commit this type of embezzlement, and by being able to prevent it and failing to do so," Peinado concludes.