The Spanish government and leading PSOE figures sharply condemned Judge Juan Carlos Peinado’s decision to open proceedings against Begoña Gómez, the wife of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, and impose precautionary measures, including surrendering her passport and reporting regularly to court. The case concerns allegations of influence peddling and embezzlement of public funds; the allegations are not findings of guilt. Peinado, an investigating judge at Madrid’s Investigative Court No. 41, sent the case toward a trial before a popular jury, which in Spain is made up of nine citizens.
Peinado’s order cited concerns that Gómez’s official police escorts could potentially help her departure from Spain. Government officials argued that the measure was politically motivated and lacked a legal foundation. In statements from La Moncloa, the proceedings were described as “persecution, obsession, and disproportion”; officials said the investigation had no legal merit and was driven by political motives.
The measures later changed on appeal. On 13 July 2026, the Madrid Provincial Court partially upheld appeals against Peinado’s decisions, narrowed the investigation and lifted Gómez’s passport restriction, ban on leaving Spain and requirement to appear in court periodically. The case nevertheless continued over the alleged influence peddling and embezzlement. The court’s review also narrowed the accusations under investigation, revoking two alleged offences previously included in the case.
The Fiscalía Provincial de Madrid has sought acquittal for Gómez and Cristina Álvarez, Gómez’s Moncloa adviser, who was also accused in connection with the case. The prosecution’s position is that the conduct attributed to them “does not constitute a criminal offense.” That stance differs from Peinado’s decision to send the case toward trial. The allegations involve Gómez’s professional activities and her relationship with businessman Juan Carlos Barrabés, as well as Álvarez’s role; their legal significance remains disputed.
Prominent PSOE ministers and party leaders voiced their outrage. Transport Minister Óscar Puente called the situation “IGNOMINIA,” while Digital Change Minister Óscar López described it as an “unprecedented outrage.” Presidency Minister Félix Bolaños said the day was disastrous for those who believe in justice. The party’s official channels reiterated Gómez’s innocence, emphasizing that she had faced two years of judicial and political pursuit. The hashtag #YoConBegoña gained traction among socialist leaders, with former Finance Minister María Jesús Montero calling the decision excessive and more akin to a political trial than a fair legal process.
Government representatives also pointed to what they saw as inconsistencies in judicial treatment. They cited a previous case in which Judge José Luis Calama of the Audiencia Nacional refused to seize former Prime Minister Zapatero’s passport during the Plus Ultra investigation. The comparison fueled further criticism of Peinado’s technical competence and impartiality. PSOE spokesperson Patxi López questioned judicial oversight, suggesting that Peinado’s actions reflected a broader issue within the system.
Opposition parties responded differently. The Partido Popular’s secretary general renewed calls for early elections, accusing the government of being embroiled in scandal and likening La Moncloa to a criminal organization. Vox, participating in the case as a popular prosecutor through the association Hazte oír, welcomed Peinado’s original decision and said it had repeatedly requested such measures.
The case’s path toward trial has since encountered procedural delays. The Madrid Provincial Court’s appeals process and the need to assign the matter to the competent court section have shaped the next steps, including the designation of the judge who would preside over the jury trial. Juan Carlos Peinado has been described as retired, and the case has remained stalled as the court system manages that transition. No trial date has been fixed in the cited reporting.
The proceedings have also become a sustained political issue because Gómez is the prime minister’s spouse, and the prosecutor has called for her acquittal while the investigating judge pursued trial proceedings. Sánchez publicly supported his wife, saying: “They have tried to break us, and we are more united.” The dispute continues to raise questions about the investigation’s scope and the role of appellate review in high-profile cases involving people close to Spain’s leadership.
Spain’s judicial system allows judges to impose precautionary measures, including passport surrender, when they perceive a risk of flight. In this case, the restrictions were later lifted on appeal while the allegations of influence peddling and embezzlement remained before the courts. The distinction between those interim measures and the appellate decisions, as well as any eventual determination of criminal responsibility, is basic to understanding the case’s changing procedural status.
