Spain's Anticorruption Prosecutor and State Legal Service reject Zapatero's bid to remove the PP-led prosecution from the Plus Ultra jewels case. The dispute centers on the legitimacy of popular action in a high-profile fiscal probe.
The legal battle over the investigation into José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero's jewels has escalated, as both the Anticorruption Prosecutor and the State Legal Service have firmly opposed the former prime minister's attempt to exclude the Partido Popular-led popular prosecution from the case. This dispute, unfolding within the separate Plus Ultra case proceedings, highlights the ongoing tension over who can participate in Spain's most sensitive judicial inquiries.
Zapatero's defense argued that the popular prosecution, spearheaded by the PP, lacks the legal standing to be involved in the investigation into the jewels seized from his office. However, prosecutors countered that barring this participation would prematurely restrict the exercise of popular action, especially before the legal classification of the alleged crimes is fully established. The State Legal Service, representing the Tax Agency as a potentially affected party, echoed this stance, emphasizing that crimes against the public treasury involve both a specific financial victim—the Tax Agency—and a broader public interest tied to the integrity of Spain's tax system. This dual dimension, they argued, justifies the involvement of citizens or entities in criminal proceedings from the perspective of defending the general interest.
The case took a new turn in early June when Judge José Luis Calama, who continues to investigate Zapatero in the broader Plus Ultra affair, opened a separate line of inquiry focused on possible tax offenses and smuggling related to the jewels. The items, valued at over €1.3 million, were found in the former prime minister's office. According to the judge, the origin of these jewels remains unexplained. Among the seized assets were three necklaces, three bracelets, three rings, and three pairs of earrings crafted from white gold and adorned with sapphires and emeralds sourced from Zambia or Thailand, with an estimated value of €1.2 million.
The debate over the legitimacy of popular prosecution is not new in Spain's legal landscape. Similar controversies have surfaced in other high-profile cases, such as the recent dispute involving Vicent Mompó, where legal standing and the boundaries of testimony were also at the forefront. For instance, the case against Mompó drew attention to the complexities of court participation and political accountability, as detailed in this report on legal action considered by Compromís.
Spain's system of popular prosecution allows political parties and civic groups to take an active role in criminal cases, a feature that distinguishes its judiciary from many European counterparts. This mechanism is designed to reinforce transparency and public oversight, particularly in cases involving alleged corruption or misuse of public funds. However, it also generates frequent legal disputes over the boundaries of participation and the risk of politicizing judicial processes. The outcome of the current dispute in the Plus Ultra jewels case could set a precedent for future investigations involving high-profile figures and the scope of popular action in Spanish courts.
