A sudden turn in one of the most talked-about investigations in recent years could influence public perception of the Spanish judicial system. Judge Arturo Zamarriego stripped two prominent participants in the case against Leire Díez—known as an informal intermediary for PSOE—of their victim status. The decision, supported by the prosecution and the defendant’s lawyers, has sparked a wave of debate among experts and the public. For many Spaniards, this move was an unexpected twist in a case linked to corruption and attempts to influence key state institutions.
The spotlight is now on businessman Víctor de Aldama and former judge Manuel García-Castellón. Both were previously recognized as victims in the case involving the acquisition and dissemination of confidential information, but the judge has changed his stance. The reason: there is no direct connection between their incidents and the main charges against Díez, namely bribery and influence peddling.
Status change
Initially, Aldama and García-Castellón were listed as victims based on claims of wiretapping and the spread of false information. However, after reviewing the case materials, Judge Zamarriego concluded that these episodes are not directly related to the crimes under investigation. The prosecution and Díez’s defense insisted on the same point, and the court ultimately agreed with their arguments.
Specifically, the case included testimony from Civil Guard commander Rubén Villalba, who claimed that Díez may have accessed private conversations between Aldama and his lawyer while Aldama was in custody. Nevertheless, the judge noted that even if these actions could be classified as breach of confidentiality, they do not pertain to the main charges.
Role of the figures involved
Manuel García-Castellón, who resigned in 2024, was known as a judge who handled high-profile cases, including the Tsunami case and possible illegal financing of Podemos. His name was often mentioned in relation to criticism from government and PSOE representatives, especially in the final years of his career. In the case against Díez, he tried to act as a private prosecutor, citing media reports about the spread of allegedly defamatory false information about him.
Víctor de Aldama, for his part, is implicated in another high-profile proceeding — the so-called Ábalos/Cerdán case, which has raised serious concerns among the PSOE leadership and the government. Other figures involved in this case include former Transport Minister José Luis Ábalos, his advisor Koldo García, and former party leader Santos Cerdán. Díez claimed to have been Cerdán’s “right-hand person,” adding further intrigue to the investigation.
Case background
Leire Díez is accused of attempting to obtain sensitive information, primarily targeting the Guardia Civil and the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. To this end, she met with journalists, former politicians, and businesspeople, as well as with Commander Villalba in one of Leganés’ (Leganés, Madrid) bars. These agencies are currently investigating other high-profile cases involving the prime minister’s circle and family.
Aldama has repeatedly claimed to possess materials capable of seriously damaging the government and has linked surveillance efforts against him to Díez’s activities. He also offered to cooperate with the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, which was pushing for the arrest of key figures in the Abalos/Cerdán case. After several months in detention, some of them were released, but the investigation is ongoing.
Consequences of the decision
The court’s ruling to revoke victim status from Aldama and García-Castellón came as a surprise to many observers. In the document, the judge points out that the case files lack concrete facts confirming their status as victims of the specific charges being investigated. In García-Castellón’s case, the evidence consists only of assumptions based on media reports, not on any concrete actions by Díez.
Previously, the judge acknowledged that both could have been subjects of ‘information gathering’ and its dissemination. However, now he believes that these episodes are not related to the main charges. The court’s decision could impact the further course of the investigation and the positions of the parties, as well as public opinion regarding the transparency and independence of judicial processes in Spain.
