Koldo García Izaguirre was sentenced to 19 years in prison for his role in the so-called Mascarillas case, prompting a dramatic scene at Spain’s Supreme Court. His lawyer, Leticia de la Hoz, was overcome with emotion as she received the court’s decision on June 22, witnesses said. The same judgment sentenced former Transport Minister José Luis Ábalos to 24 years. Businessman Víctor de Aldama received four years. The court attributed responsibility to a scheme involving multiple participants and treated Aldama’s testimony as supported by “multiple peripheral elements of corroboration,” information from reporting on the ruling.
The verdict intensified scrutiny of De la Hoz, who is formally charged in a separate investigation into alleged attempts to obstruct justice. She was due to appear before National Court Judge Santiago Pedraz on July 14, accused of pressuring businesswoman Carmen Pano to retract claims that she delivered €90,000 in cash to PSOE headquarters in connection with a hydrocarbons licence. Investigators allege De la Hoz offered Pano up to €250,000 to change her testimony. The alleged offer and the underlying claim about the cash delivery remain distinct issues in separate proceedings.
Pedraz has said the obstruction inquiry is not the forum for deciding whether Pano and her driver, Álvaro Gallego, actually transported the money. The truth of their accounts belongs in the separate investigation into the alleged delivery and suspected irregular party financing. The question before him is whether the lawyer’s alleged conduct could constitute an offence against the administration of justice. La Razón reported that the Guardia Civil’s Central Operative Unit had three screenshots of communications between Gallego and De la Hoz. Gallego said he had deleted relevant WhatsApp* (принадлежит Metа, которая признана экстремистской организацией и запрещена в РФ) messages. Pano, according to the same reporting, gave evidence to investigators and later ratified it in court.
Tension at the Supreme Court rose during a direct exchange between De la Hoz and Alberto Durán, the Partido Popular’s legal representative in the Koldo case. Visibly distressed, De la Hoz pressed Durán on whether he intended to question her about the alleged €250,000 offer at her upcoming hearing and whether he would seek precautionary measures against her. Durán’s response prompted De la Hoz to suggest she might disclose damaging information about the PP in the National Court, a remark observers interpreted as a veiled threat to involve the opposition in the scandal.
Throughout the trial, De la Hoz drew attention for her legal tactics and confrontations with the court and the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. Some of her questioning reportedly reinforced the case against García rather than undermining it. De la Hoz and Ábalos, along with other figures in the PSOE, have argued that the Mascarillas case is politically motivated and aimed at destabilising the government of Pedro Sánchez. The courtroom confrontation added to that dispute, while the Supreme Court’s judgment assigned different sentences to the defendants.
Judge Pedraz’s May 27 order placed De la Hoz at the centre of the alleged effort to change Pano’s account and referred to possible involvement by other lawyers, including Ismael Oliver. The reported amount offered rose from €50,000 to €250,000, with the alleged aim of helping Ábalos and García. On June 3, De la Hoz approached the Guardia Civil’s Central Operative Unit seeking to present evidence that she said would establish her innocence and implicate Pano in soliciting a €10,000 commission for an illegal fuel operator. On June 8, Pedraz formally summoned De la Hoz as a defendant in the obstruction investigation.
Following the Supreme Court judgment, Ábalos and García pursued attempts to have it annulled, and anti-corruption prosecutors asked the court to reject those challenges. Further recourse to Spain’s Constitutional Court remained a possible legal avenue after the Supreme Court addressed the nullity claims. Aldama received different post-judgment treatment: LegalToday reported that his entry into prison was suspended subject to conditions, including not committing another offence and completing one year of community work.
The legal and political fallout from the Mascarillas case continues to ripple through Spain’s institutions. The case has drawn comparisons with other high-profile scandals involving public officials and judicial investigations. A recent controversy surrounding María Jesús Montero and Vicente Fernández, detailed in this report on the SEPI and Leire case, highlights persistent challenges of oversight and accountability in Spanish politics.
Spain’s judicial system faces mounting pressure to address allegations of corruption and political interference. The Mascarillas case has brought accusations and legal challenges, along with public confrontations, underscoring the difficulty of separating political interests from judicial proceedings. The separate inquiry into the alleged effort to influence Pano’s testimony does not itself determine whether the cash delivery took place; that question remains for the proceeding examining the alleged delivery. García also remains connected to separate National Court investigations concerning other alleged conduct during his time at the Transport Ministry.
