Judge José Luis Calama has referred evidence concerning the leak of former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero’s personal agendas and messages to the Madrid courts. In October 2026, a Madrid investigating court opened proceedings to identify those responsible for disclosing reserved information in reports prepared by UDEF, Spain’s Economic and Fiscal Crime Unit. The leaked material reportedly included schedules, meetings, addresses, passwords, personal-life details and conversations with Zapatero’s secretary, Gertrudis Alcázar.
The disclosure followed the publication by several media outlets of details from UDEF material, including information with no apparent connection to the underlying judicial inquiry. The leak exposed private meetings and communications, some involving current Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, and quickly drew headlines. The published agendas show that Zapatero met Sánchez at least ten times in 2024 and 2025, often to discuss political matters such as the situation with Puigdemont and foreign policy. Coverage by El Español and El Confidencial highlighted these contacts and suggested, without direct evidence, that Zapatero’s influence may have benefited his business interests. Some articles implied a connection between political access and financial gain, fueling public speculation.
The Madrid proceedings are separate from the substantive Plus Ultra investigation, which Calama is handling at the Audiencia Nacional. The referral to the ordinary criminal courts, known in Spanish procedure as deducir testimonio, allows a separate inquiry into facts that may constitute an offense. It is not a finding of criminal responsibility. The conduct under examination includes the possible disclosure of secrets or confidential information connected with judicial proceedings and the release of protected personal data.
The Plus Ultra case concerns alleged influence-peddling and irregularities surrounding the airline, which received a €53 million state rescue after the coronavirus pandemic. Businessman Julio Martínez Martínez, known as “Julito,” has been examined as an intermediary between Zapatero and the airline’s executives. In testimony reported by El País, Martínez said that during discussions about the financing request, he passed on to Zapatero the information he considered impressive. He also described keeping a work agenda for clients while the former prime minister maintained a largely political agenda. These matters belong to the underlying Plus Ultra inquiry, not the separate investigation into the leak.
One episode examined in the Plus Ultra reporting is a January 26, 2021 lunch at Madrid restaurant Portonovo involving Zapatero and Martínez. El Confidencial Digital reported that Martínez confirmed Zapatero’s presence, differing from an initial UDEF account that placed Tomás Guerrero at the table. The reservation was reportedly handled through Alcázar, and a member of Zapatero’s security detail allegedly went to the restaurant after telephone contact failed. Information from the report, Martínez told the judge that Zapatero had no interest in or involvement with the creation of the Dubai structure.
After the unauthorized disclosure, Calama asked a Madrid court to investigate, citing potential criminal offenses, particularly the revelation of secret procedural actions or confidential information. Calama also questioned why steps had not been taken earlier to prevent the release of personal data unrelated to the case, such as instructing police to redact sensitive material before it reached the parties involved.
Following the incident, Calama restricted access to the virtual case files. The Partido Popular, which leads the popular prosecution, will retain access, alongside groups including Vox, Manos Limpias, Hazte Oír, Iustitia Europa and Liberum. These organizations have been active in legal actions targeting figures close to the government, including Begoña Gómez and David Sánchez.
The agendas, seized during a police search of Zapatero’s office on May 19, contained political meetings as well as personal details. Media outlets published information about Zapatero’s regular visits to the hairdresser, dinners with television presenter Javier Ruiz and his partner Sarah Santaolalla, and messages about arranging interviews with El Plural. The details were irrelevant to the investigation but generated further headlines.
The leak reflects a broader concern in Spanish judicial cases: personal data taken from devices during investigations can enter public circulation even when it is unrelated to the alleged conduct. The Madrid inquiry creates a separate track focused on possible responsibility for the disclosure, while Calama’s court continues examining the underlying case. The proceedings also raise a practical question: how can investigators separate relevant evidence from private material before case files become accessible to parties or third parties?
In Spain, the handling of confidential information in judicial cases has been a recurring concern. The Audiencia Nacional, a central criminal court, often deals with politically sensitive matters and faces close legal and media scrutiny. UDEF investigates economic crimes and prepares reports that can become part of high-profile proceedings. The involvement of political parties and activist groups in legal cases adds complexity, as access to files can carry political significance. Calama’s referral places the alleged disclosure under separate judicial scrutiny while the underlying Plus Ultra investigation continues.
