MadridThe attempt by controversial judge Juan Carlos Peinado to tighten the grip on Pedro Sánchez has claimed a new victim: the Minister of the Presidency and Justice, Félix Bolaños. In a ruling signed this Monday, the investigating judge in the Begoña Gómez case submits a reasoned statement to the Supreme Court to investigate Bolaños for alleged crimes of embezzlement of public funds and perjury. This stems from the appointment of Cristina Álvarez, an advisor to the Moncloa Palace who worked as an assistant to Pedro Sánchez's wife. He attributes responsibility for her appointment to her during his time as Secretary General of the Presidency of the Spanish government. Bolaños appeared before the media this afternoon to express his "complete calm" at the judge's decision, but also his "concern for the image of justice" that this ruling leaves behind.
"It's good news for the justice system that the Supreme Court can rule on this investigation and the reasoned statement. A professional Supreme Court that will make a fair decision based on the facts," Bolaños predicted. The minister avoided classifying the decision as prevarication, although the Moncloa considers this case within the lawfare It's already known. Basically, that it's a "political case," government sources reiterate. The Moncloa government hopes the Supreme Court will "put things in order" and that Peinado will once again receive a reprimand like the ones he has already received on more than one occasion from the Provincial Court of Madrid.
Peinado's ruling is full of typos and contains a particularly notable error when summarizing Bolaños's witness statement. It explains that the former minister met with Gómez and Álvarez on two or three occasions: "One time was at a political event to present the candidacy of the Spanish Prime Minister for the 2019 general elections (...) The last time was at the funeral home for the death of Ms. Gómez," writes the judge, referring to last year's transfer.
The Bolaños-Peinado tension
The crime of false witness attributed to Bolaños would supposedly be for having lied when testified about the case on April 16"With malicious reticence, he has omitted the correct answers, the ones that reflected the truth, which he knew when the questions were asked as a witness and under oath," Peinado concludes in the text. In fact, when the audio of the statement was made public, the tension between the judge and the minister was already evident. "I don't know why you're smiling," Peinado retorted. "I find your questioning very surprising, that's why I smiled," he replied. "Don't give me evasive answers," the judge replied.
The judge wanted Bolaños to explain who was responsible for appointing Álvarez as Begoña Gómez's assistant and even suspended the questioning so the minister could be sure. Finally, he named Raúl Díaz as the person to whom Álvarez reported as responsible for the administration and coordination of staff at the Palau and Council of Ministers buildings in the Moncloa complex. He was allegedly appointed by the Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency, Alfredo González, who in turn was appointed by Bolaños himself. Peinado attributes the false witness to the minister because Raúl Díaz later denied having appointed Álvarez, although he did admit that this employee reported to him hierarchically. "Therefore, the reasoned statement is based on an answer the minister did not give," complains Bolaños's entourage.
"He may have directly participated in the appointment of Cristina Álvarez as temporary staff and knew or controlled the tasks she performed, receiving her remuneration from a budget item in the general state budget," Peinado maintains. This would be the basis for attributing him the crime of embezzlement. The judge questions the use of public funds to hire Álvarez to perform tasks that do not reflect Gómez's public actions as the president's wife, but rather private activities.
The Supreme Court's decision
As a member of the Spanish government, Bolaños has immunity before the Supreme Court, so it will be the high court that must rule on Peinado's proposal. Specifically, the Admissions Division is responsible for considering whether to accept the reasoned statement and appoint an investigating judge. It remains to be seen whether the judges who comprise it—Andrés Martínez Arrieta, Julián Sánchez Melgar, Pablo Llarena, Ángel Hurtado, and Leopoldo Puente—will accept the Madrid judge's argument. If so, the Koldo-Ábalos case will include the Attorney General, the Minister of the Presidency, and Pedro Sánchez's until recently right-hand man, Santos Cerdán. In other words, practically the entire inner circle of the Spanish Prime Minister.
"It's pouring rain," reacted the leader of the People's Party (PP), Alberto Núñez Feijóo, upon hearing the news. Speaking to the media after participating in an event hosted by the newspaper ABC, he stated that the Spanish government has "too many legal problems to add one more." However, he preferred to "be cautious" while waiting for the Supreme Court to decide whether Peinado's request should be appealed.
The UCO provides the contract by which Cerdán bought 45% of a company implicated in illegal commissions.
The Central Operative Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard has submitted to the Supreme Court the contract by which Santos Cerdán acquired 45% of the company Servinabar, a company under scrutiny for alleged irregular public works contracts, for €6,000. The contract was signed by Cerdán and businessman Joseba Antxón Alonso Egurrola, and the officers found it at the latter's home. Cerdán's defense team, which had requested the document be produced, emphasized that it is a "private contract"—not a deed, as the UCO initially claimed—and denies that it had any "legal effect." The company has also denied that Cerdán was ever a partner, although his seal appears on the document.
The former Socialist party member's lawyer, Benet Salellas, explained that his client will provide all explanations during his appearance before the Supreme Court on June 30, which he has requested be broadcast via streaming and media, although this phase of the proceedings is confidential. According to the lawyer, they want to avoid "parallel trials" in the case.