A sharp turn in the high-profile Leire case could affect the course of the investigation and public perception of the judicial system in Spain. A Madrid judge has reconsidered his own decision and removed two prominent participants from the proceedings, who had previously been considered victims. This development has sparked significant reaction among lawyers and the public, as the names in question have already surfaced in other scandalous cases.
An unexpected twist
Judge Arturo Zamarriego, who is leading the Leire investigation, has overturned his previous ruling that recognized businessman Víctor de Aldama and former judge Manuel García Castellón as private prosecutors. Their participation in the case has now ended, as the court did not find them to be victims connected to the events under investigation.
Aldama tried to join the case, claiming he was the victim of a leak of confidential information. He said that during meetings between Civil Guard commander Rubén Villalba and former socialist Leire Díez, issues concerning him personally were discussed and the officer even took notes. However, the judge found that these episodes are unrelated to the main investigation, which concerns possible corruption offenses and influence peddling.
Arguments of the parties
As for former judge García Castellón, his arguments also failed to convince the court. He referred to media reports which, in his view, spread false information damaging his honor and reputation. Nevertheless, the judge pointed out that even if such actions took place, they could be considered defamation, but they are not connected to the current investigation.
As a result, in the official ruling the judge revoked his decision from November 4, when both parties were admitted to the case as private prosecutors. Now, after reviewing the appeal filed by Leyre Díez’s defense, their status in the case has been annulled.
Opportunities for return
Despite their removal, the judge left Aldama and García Castellón the chance to try to rejoin the proceedings, but in a different capacity. If they consider themselves to have been harmed by the former Socialist’s actions, they are invited to file a separate complaint or lawsuit with the appropriate court. Furthermore, they may again petition for involvement in the case, but as representatives of the public prosecution.
This court decision highlights the importance of clearly separating personal interests from the focus of the investigation. The ruling has sparked lively debate among experts, as it could set a precedent for other high-profile cases where the status of participants is often disputed.
