David Sánchez, a relative of Spain’s current prime minister, has filed a request with the provincial court of Badajoz to replace all three judges assigned to his case. He argues that the panel lacks impartiality. Sánchez stands accused of abuse of office and misconduct during his 2017 appointment to the provincial administration. Prosecutors and public accusers are calling for a three-year prison sentence.
Allegations of bias and details of the proceedings
In his petition, Sánchez cites a decision made by the judges in September of last year, when they rejected the appeals of all those involved in the case. According to Sánchez, the decision contained subjective assessments and language that, in his view, points to judicial bias. He also notes that the judges had previously made crucial decisions during the investigation stage, which, he believes, limits the defense’s ability to argue the case in court.
The judicial panel and potential consequences
The court includes the chair of the provincial panel, José Antonio Patrocinio Polo, case rapporteur Emilio Francisco Serrano Molera, and judge Dolores Fernández Gallardo. David Sánchez has become the second participant in the proceedings to request their recusal—previously, the head of the provincial administration’s HR department filed a similar motion. Lawyers note that the chances of such requests being granted are slim; however, the issue could delay the start of the hearings.
The Role of the Higher Court and the Political Context
If the judges refuse to voluntarily step down from the case, they must submit explanations to the region’s highest judicial authority—the Superior Court of Justice of Extremadura (Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Extremadura). This body will make the final decision: whether to keep the current panel or appoint a new one. Hearings are scheduled to begin 50 days after the snap elections in Extremadura, where one of the accused, local Socialist leader Miguel Ángel Gallardo, is running for head of the autonomous community.
Defense Arguments and Response to the Court’s Language
In their statement, Sánchez’s defense emphasizes that the judges used emotionally charged language and even ironic expressions in their rulings, which, according to the lawyers, is unacceptable for an objective review of the case. Particular attention is drawn to the fact that in one document, the judges used a term that, according to the defense, was inappropriate and could have influenced the perception of the accused. The lawyers argue that such phrasing creates the impression that guilt has already been established and undermines the principle of the presumption of innocence.
Possible scenarios going forward
The defense insists that the court’s September decision essentially resembles a guilty verdict, leaving the accused with no chance for an impartial trial. If the motion is granted, the proceedings will start over with a new panel of judges. Otherwise, the hearings will proceed as planned, though potential delays may occur due to the consideration of appeals. In any case, the situation surrounding the David Sánchez case remains tense and could impact the political climate in the region.
