A new round of confrontation is unfolding in a case involving the wife of Spain’s prime minister. The defense of Begoña Gómez objects to the prospect of a possible trial for embezzlement being handled by a jury. According to her lawyers, none of the necessary criteria for such a trial have been met.
Begoña Gómez’s lawyer, Antonio Camacho, has filed an appeal against the decision made a week ago by Judge Juan Carlos Peinado. The document emphasizes that neither the essence of the accusation nor the status of the defendants meets the requirements of the law on jury trials. Additionally, the defense insists that the charges against Gómez, her aide Cristina Álvarez, and official Francisco Martín Aguirre have no real foundation.
The appeal notes that Álvarez’s correspondence with representatives of the sponsors of the chair that Gómez oversaw at Universidad Complutense de Madrid cannot be considered a crime. According to the lawyer, such actions are common practice and remain within the bounds of social norms. The defense is convinced that interpreting them as embezzlement is an overly broad reading of the criminal code.
Over a year and a half of investigation, Judge Peinado expanded the list of potential violations, adding embezzlement and illegal professional activity to the initial suspicions of corruption and influence peddling. A separate inquiry is also underway to determine whether any rules were violated when Álvarez was hired as an assistant to work with Gómez. Both women, as well as the government, deny these allegations.
The lawyer emphasizes that Gómez did not hold any positions related to public administration and therefore does not meet the criteria necessary for the alleged offense. Moreover, her work within the department was unpaid, which, according to the defense, completely eliminates any motive for personal gain.
Lawyers also note that some of the materials on which the prosecution is based were only provided to them after the judge had already decided to refer the case to a jury. In their view, this violates the right to a fair defense.
Another argument is the lack of clear rules regulating the duties of spouses’ aides of prime ministers. In Spain, there is no official status or defined list of functions for such staff, which, according to the defense, makes the accusations even more questionable.
Gómez’s appeal was joined by the defense for Cristina Álvarez, who also believes that the decision to pursue a jury trial contradicts the provincial court’s earlier finding that there were no signs of embezzlement in Álvarez’s actions.
