The Provincial Court of Madrid (Audiencia Provincial de Madrid) has issued a ruling that could significantly impact the high-profile investigation. The judges unanimously upheld the actions taken by investigators in the alleged malversation (malversación) case involving Begoña Gómez, the wife of Spain’s Prime Minister, and her advisor Cristina Álvarez. The appeal filed by both women was rejected, allowing the court to continue its inquiry into their activities.
At the center of the case is the procedure by which Álvarez was appointed as advisor to the Prime Minister’s wife. Investigators suspect that her work may have gone beyond her official duties and could be tied to Gómez’s personal interests. According to the court, case materials suggest that the advisor’s actions may have caused harm to public funds.
Defense arguments
Begoña Gómez’s lawyer, former minister Antonio Camacho, insisted there was no criminal offense. He argued that Gómez is not a public official and that her role within the “Competetive Social Transformation” (Transformación Social Competitiva) department provided her with no personal income. According to the defense, the emails cited by investigators related exclusively to academic work, not personal gain.
Camacho also emphasized that the appointment of Álvarez did not violate any procedures, and Gómez herself did not receive any financial benefit from her actions. He expressed doubt that such actions could be classified as embezzlement of public funds, and called the accusations an overly broad interpretation of criminal law.
Court’s position
Despite the defense’s arguments, the judges found that there are sufficient grounds for the investigation to continue. The decision notes that appointing a close friend as an advisor, bypassing professional protocol specialists, may indicate a possible personal interest and abuse of authority.
The court pointed out that Álvarez’s functions may have gone beyond the standard duties of an advisor. In particular, it was noted that her activities might not have been focused on fulfilling official tasks, but rather on serving Gómez’s private interests, which could potentially have harmed the budget.
Details of the investigation
The investigation has been ongoing for over a year and a half. Initially, Begoña Gómez was suspected of influence peddling and business corruption, but later new charges were added, including embezzlement and professional misconduct. Last summer, the judge opened a separate line of inquiry related to possible embezzlement in the hiring of Álvarez.
The judges emphasized that it is too early to make any final conclusions regarding the guilt or innocence of those involved. The investigation is ongoing, and a final decision will be made after all necessary procedures are completed. At the same time, the court found no violations in the appointment procedure of the adviser, focusing solely on possible abuse of power and damage to the state.
Reaction of the parties
The court’s decision came as a surprise to the defense, which had hoped for the case to be dropped. Representatives for Gomez and Alvarez continue to assert their innocence and say they intend to seek full exoneration. The government also rejects all accusations, emphasizing that the actions of the prime minister’s spouse were within the bounds of the law.
Meanwhile, public interest in the case remains high. Debate continues within Spanish society about the appropriateness of appointing close associates to government positions and the transparency of top officials’ conduct. The investigation involving Begoña Gomez and her adviser is ongoing, and its outcome could influence the country’s political landscape.
