Yesterday in Madrid, a new stage began in the high-profile case involving Begoña Gómez, the wife of Spain’s prime minister. The defense insists that if the judge does not close the investigation, at the very least the jury trial should be limited to a single charge—undue influence. According to the lawyers, the remaining allegations are not closely enough related to be examined together in a single jury process.
Four possible offenses have come under scrutiny, including undue influence and business corruption linked to entrepreneur Juan Carlos Barrabés. Additional suspicions involve misappropriation and professional misconduct related to Gómez’s activities at the university. In a separate proceeding, authorities are investigating possible misuse of resources, with allegations that an adviser from La Moncloa may have assisted the prime minister’s wife in her private projects.
At the hearing held the previous day, the judge informed three of the defendants of the intention to move forward with a jury trial and invited the prosecutors to clarify their charges. Neither Gómez nor any of the other suspects appeared in person. The defense for Barrabés and the adviser also sought to have the case dismissed. A representative for one of the accused emphasized that the university-related episodes should not be considered by a jury since they are not covered under the relevant law.
The Madrid prosecutor’s office was the first to speak at the hearing, reiterating that it sees no signs of undue influence on decisions, and that family ties to the prime minister cannot be considered evidence. In an extensive document, the prosecutor stated that even if Gómez’s actions raise ethical concerns, this is not sufficient grounds for criminal prosecution. Notably, the prosecution concluded that there was neither direct nor indirect pressure that could have benefitted Gómez.
Earlier, the judge suggested that the prime minister’s wife’s actions might have been influenced by her family position. Investigators believe that Barrabés assisted Gómez with a university department position, and in return she signed recommendation letters for his companies, enabling them to secure major contracts. However, as the prosecution points out, the infractions identified are administrative in nature and do not amount to criminal charges. No evidence of personal gain from the use of software was found despite thorough financial scrutiny.
The prosecutors, including representatives of public organizations, are demanding that the investigation continue and that further interrogations take place, including calling Pedro Sánchez for questioning once again. In their view, those involved in the case used their positions for personal benefit, and this should be examined under all sections of the charges.
