The CGPJ sends to the courts of Madrid the complaint about judge Peinado for Begoña Gómez's escorts
The Judicial Power concludes that he committed a minor offense of disregard and urges the TSJ of Madrid to apply a sanction to him
MadridProgressives have prevailed over conservatives in the General Council of the Judiciary and, thanks to the approval of president Isabel Perelló in the form of a casting vote, they have proposed sanctioning judge Juan Carlos Peinado for having insinuated that Begoña Gómez's escorts could help her flee. The informative proceedings were opened a month ago and already at that first moment the CGPJ was divided because the conservative members alleged that reviewing the judge's order on precautionary measures was not within the CGPJ's competence. And this entrenchment of positions, which hindered the first attempt to reach an agreement, has been maintained until the outcome. Now the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid will have to decide whether or not to sanction the judge: it can give him a warning, impose a fine of up to 500 euros, or both.
Initially, the promoter of the disciplinary action proposed filing the complaint because he considered that he could only analyze it if the case was referred to him by the superior court that knew the resolution as a result of an appeal filed against it. But the Permanent Commission has concluded that there are precedents that allow the use of these expressions to be sanctioned equally without having to wait for this prior step.
"These agents, at a certain moment, can, either on their own initiative or following orders from their hierarchical superiors, collaborate in the action or actions to facilitate this escape," said Juan Carlos Peinado in the order sending Begoña Gómez to trial. Later, he apologized for the expressions, but he maintained his suspicions. The Madrid Court revoked the passport withdrawal of Pedro Sánchez's wife and reprimanded the judge for an "unfortunate wording." Now, legal sources familiar with the decision tell ARA that the CGPJ considered that Peinado's statements exceeded what was necessary to legally justify the resolution and constituted an objective disregard for the National Police.
On the other hand, the CGPJ has dismissed the complaint filed by the Minister of the Presidency, Justice and Relations with the Courts, Félix Bolaños, for the leaking of his testimony, for the treatment he received and for different procedural actions by the magistrate. No indications of disciplinary infringement have been appreciated and the investigation found no evidence to attribute the leaks to Peinado. This decision has been supported by the dissenting votes of progressives Argelia Queralt and Bernardo Fernández, who believe that he committed a minor offense: "The reiteration of warnings, reproaches about the way of responding and censures of the witness's gestures exceeded an isolated episode of dialectical tension and justified it".
A minor offense of delay in another case
Likewise, the CGPJ has filed another complaint with the TSJ of Madrid against Juan Carlos Peinado within the framework of another case. The journalist Nacho Abad filed a complaint for an unjustified delay – of a year and a half – in the resolution of a request for dismissal. Legal sources point out to this newspaper that the internal investigation has concluded that there are no indications of deliberate action or a serious infraction, but it has detected a delay – close to three months – attributable personally to the magistrate when the matter was in a position to be resolved. The conclusion has been a minor offense of delay in the dispatch of matters.
Three more complaints dismissed
On the other hand, the CGPJ has shelved three more complaints against Judge Peinado. The first was filed by Cristina Álvarez – advisor to Begoña Gómez at Moncloa – for the leak of a judicial resolution published in OK Diario before it was signed and notified. The investigation did not find sufficient evidence to attribute the dissemination of this information to the magistrate. The published news contained some data that did not match the actual content of the resolution.
The second concerned the extension of an investigation for alleged corruption affecting a high-ranking official of the Madrid City Council following a complaint filed by Más Madrid. The promoter of the disciplinary action concluded that the end of the investigation was due to a legal interpretation by the judge that was subsequently corrected by the Madrid Court. Before this decision, Más Madrid had publicly urged the CGPJ to resolve the case before Peinado's retirement, scheduled for next September.
The third originated from a private individual, who testified as an investigated party and alleged that the judge did not allow her to testify by videoconference, treated the lawyers with disrespect, and ordered disproportionate precautionary measures. However, the promoter replied that deciding how the testimony should be conducted and imposing precautionary measures are decisions made by the judge in the exercise of their jurisdictional function, which can be appealed and therefore falls outside the disciplinary scope.
