The Madrid Provincial Court has upheld a jury trial for Begoña Gómez on influence peddling and embezzlement, but dismissed business corruption charges. The case highlights judicial tensions and repeated legal challenges.
The Madrid Provincial Court has confirmed that Begoña Gómez, wife of Spain’s Prime Minister, will face a jury trial for alleged influence peddling and embezzlement. After more than two years of contentious investigation led by Judge Juan Carlos Peinado, the court has dismissed the more serious charges of business corruption and misappropriation, narrowing the scope of the case. This decision follows a series of appeals and corrections that have marked the proceedings since the initial complaint was filed in April 2024.
Throughout the investigation, Judge Peinado’s actions have drawn both criticism and support from the higher court. His decisions—ranging from indictments to search orders—have triggered a steady flow of appeals. The court’s latest ruling not only limits the charges but also orders the return of passports to Gómez and her aide, Cristina Álvarez, and lifts their obligation to report to the court twice monthly. The next step will require all parties to request the formal opening of the trial and adjust their legal positions accordingly.
Among the most significant interventions by the Madrid court was its early rejection of a request to dismiss the case, despite labeling parts of the original complaint as implausible and factually incorrect. The court instructed investigators to focus solely on public aid linked to businessman Juan Carlos Barrabés. Later, it annulled a search of Barrabés’s business premises, emphasizing that fundamental rights must be respected during criminal investigations.
Other notable rulings include the removal of charges against Joaquín Goyache, rector of the Complutense University, and Juan José Güemes, a senior figure at IE and former Madrid regional minister. The court found no grounds for their indictment and criticized Peinado for converting witness statements into formal accusations without proper legal safeguards. In another decision, the court supported the investigation into the hiring of Álvarez at La Moncloa, suggesting the existence of an institutionalized structure that enabled a clear deviation from her official duties.
Attempts to expand the case to the government’s 2020 bailout of Air Europa were blocked, with the court citing insufficient justification for such an inquiry. Similarly, the court ordered the removal of Francisco Martín Aguirre, former Government Delegate in Madrid, from the list of accused, citing a lack of evidence linking him to any wrongdoing in Álvarez’s hiring.
While the court has at times rebuked Judge Peinado for lack of clarity or insufficient legal reasoning—such as when it annulled his initial order to send Gómez to a jury trial—it has also backed his core investigation into alleged embezzlement. The most recent decision leaves only the charges of influence peddling and embezzlement for the jury to consider, and instructs the judge to return seized documents and relax precautionary measures for the accused.
This high-profile case has unfolded amid broader debates about judicial independence and political pressure in Spain. The tension between courts and investigators has been a recurring theme, as seen in other recent legal battles involving government figures. For example, the issue of judicial autonomy was highlighted when the former president of the Supreme Court spoke out about external pressures on the judiciary, a topic explored in detail in this related report.
As the proceedings move toward a public trial, the case against Begoña Gómez remains a focal point for legal and political scrutiny. The court’s decisions underscore the complexity of prosecuting high-level officials and the importance of procedural safeguards. Notably, the businessman Barrabés, initially thought to be included in the jury trial, has been excluded from this phase by the court’s latest ruling. The outcome of the trial could have significant implications for the boundaries of political accountability and judicial oversight in Spain.
