The investigation into nearly 80 jewels valued at €1.3 million, found in the Madrid office of former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, has entered a new phase. Judge José Luis Calama of the Audiencia Nacional has formally invited the Spanish Tax Agency (Agencia Tributaria) to join the case as a potentially affected party. The court is examining possible offenses against the public treasury and smuggling. The collection’s provenance and legal status remain basic questions.
Information from the court order accessed by EL PAÍS, the judge considers the Tax Agency directly connected to the case because of the potential loss of state revenue. Under Spanish law, tax fraud exceeding €120,000 can carry prison sentences of one to five years, while smuggling involving goods worth more than €150,000 carries similar penalties. The judge’s view is that the alleged offenses could give the Tax Agency grounds to pursue criminal and civil actions.
Judge Calama questioned Zapatero last week about the jewels, which the National Police found in a safe while searching his office on Calle de Ferraz. Zapatero said he would address their provenance in more detail in a further statement within a week or ten days. His lawyer had unsuccessfully sought a postponement, saying there was not enough time to prepare after the historic Madrid jewelry house Ansorena appraised the collection at €1.3 million just days earlier. The judge rejected the delay, saying the defense had adequate time to respond. The collection has been described as three sets, with rubies and emeralds alongside sapphires.
Zapatero has said the jewels were an official gift linked to the June 2007 visit to Madrid by Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud. His defense has asked the court for assistance from Saudi Arabia to establish whether the pieces were an official gift. Before deciding whether to pursue that request, Judge Calama asked Spain’s Subdirectorate General for State Heritage for records of institutional gifts presented to the Presidency of the Government during Zapatero’s mandates, covering 2004-2008 and 2008-2011. Those records could clarify whether the jewels were registered as state gifts or treated as private property.
After the appraisal, Judge Calama charged Zapatero with tax fraud and smuggling, citing the lack of documentation about the jewels’ origin. Prosecutors have also argued that the inquiry may warrant consideration of misappropriation of public funds if valuable official gifts were not transferred to or recorded by the State. The judge has sought clarification from State Heritage before deciding whether to formally add that offense. These potential offenses remain separate from the question of whether the jewels were an official gift or privately owned.
The jewelry proceedings are separate from the broader Plus Ultra investigation, which concerns alleged influence peddling and other suspected offenses tied to the government’s €53 million rescue of the airline in 2021. The jewels were found during a search connected to that inquiry, but their provenance and any possible implications involving tax and customs, as well as public property, are being examined on a separate procedural track. Zapatero’s lawyer, Víctor Manuel Moreno Catena, filed a motion this Thursday to annul the entire investigation and exclude evidence gathered by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. He argues that the former prime minister’s rights were violated and that some evidence was improperly obtained.
Judge Calama is expected to rule on the defense’s request for annulment in the coming days or weeks, though no specific deadline has been set. Any decision can be appealed. The case has drawn attention amid continued scrutiny of political figures in Spain and recent controversies involving the PSOE and government officials. A major corruption verdict against PSOE members recently sparked debate in Congress and criticism from public figures, as detailed in this report on political tensions following a PSOE corruption sentence.
Spain's legal structure treats crimes against the public treasury and smuggling as serious offenses, particularly when large sums are involved. The Audiencia Nacional often handles high-profile cases involving former officials and complex financial matters. The investigation’s outcome could affect how similar cases are managed, including the Tax Agency’s role in judicial proceedings.
