The wife of the Prime Minister, Begoña Gómez, has filed a new appeal to avoid being tried for influence peddling, business corruption, trademark misappropriation, and embezzlement. Her lawyer, former socialist minister Antonio Camacho, has asked the Provincial Court of Madrid to overturn Judge Juan Carlos Peinado’s decision to send her to a trial with a popular jury. In the appeal dated Wednesday, which EL PAÍS has accessed, the defense argues that “the only conclusion that can be drawn” from the instructor’s actions is that he is acting against her “for being the spouse of the Prime Minister.”
Thus, Gómez’s lawyer reiterates the position he has maintained throughout the entire investigation: that there is no evidence against Pedro Sánchez’s wife and that the judge is basing his case on mere “conjectures.” On this occasion, the lawyer speaks following Peinado’s rejection of the complaints filed by the defenses against his decision to summon them during Holy Week to inform them, once again, that if they went to trial, they would be judged by a popular jury, that is, by citizens and not by a court composed of judges.
Camacho warns the Madrid Court that Peinado dismissed the defenses’ complaints without any reasoning. “He copied the legal reasoning from a different order, issued in a different context, with a different procedural purpose and, what is more serious, that contains no response whatsoever to the specific legal issues raised in the reform appeal,” he emphasized.
Thus, he demands that the higher body require Peinado to justify his decisions and to provide “a minimum determination of which facts are attributed to each of the investigated individuals.” In his opinion, this delimitation “has not been made at any time,” which generates “an evident confusion in this case.” For the defense, the judge’s actions “are not a mere formal defect without legal consequences,” but rather “produce a constitutionally relevant material defenselessness” because it prevents the investigated from “knowing the reasons why their arguments have been rejected.”
Peinado began investigating Begoña Gómez in April 2024 following a complaint filed by Manos Limpias, and later expanded the case with lawsuits promoted by Hazte Oír and Vox. On one hand, he investigated the professional activity of the president’s wife with businessmen and her employment relationship with the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), as well as the development of software for that study center. For these facts, he attributes crimes of influence peddling, business corruption, and trademark misappropriation (he also accused her of professional intrusion but ended up discarding it). On the other hand, he tried to determine whether there was a diversion of public money by hiring Cristina Álvarez (also investigated) as her advisor so that she ended up collaborating with her private activity instead of her institutional work. This thesis supports the alleged embezzlement.
Rejects that every president’s wife is an “influence peddler”
Within the framework of her appeal, the defense dismantles the judge’s argument that “an immediate and significant change occurred in Gómez’s professional trajectory” with Pedro Sánchez’s arrival in the government. It argues that she was already directing a master’s program at the Complutense and that “this ‘error’ is only understood if the intention is to link access to the Presidency of the Government with obtaining advantages for my client that would not have been possible without it.” Thus, it accuses Peinado of trying to “construct ab initio [from the beginning] the narrative of the alleged influence peddling.” At this point, the lawyer also emphasizes that the doubt raised by the judge about Gómez’s hiring at the UCM “does not correspond to what was unanimously declared by the university officials, who have made clear that no irregularity existed in the appointments.”
Similarly, Camacho calls it “unacceptable” that Peinado claims Gómez mediated to grant a subsidy to a Temporary Business Union in which a company of businessman Juan Carlos Barrabés (also investigated in this case who worked in the Complutense master’s program) participated. And he recalls that the wife appears as a witness in the investigation that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office has open regarding approved awards that could affect European funds.
The lawyer insists that the “data” on which Peinado bases himself “are either false or do not have the weight that the instructor gives them,” so he understands that “the only conclusion that can be drawn” is that Gómez is being investigated “for being the spouse of the Prime Minister.” Already in the complaint appeal filed by Gómez’s defense on April 20, Camacho asked “on what factual premise of criminal relevance is the apodictic assertion based that for being the spouse of the Prime Minister ‘she influences every citizen.’” In his opinion, “only the personal prejudice of the judge” allows such an assertion to be maintained. On that occasion, he accused Peinado of “constructing a parallel reality disregarding everything done after almost two years of investigation, nearly 30 volumes of case files, and dozens and dozens of statements given.” And he reproached that, under the judge’s premise, “every wife of a Prime Minister has, by that sole fact, the status of influence peddler.”
Read more More than 600 drug boats operate in the Strait, according to the Department of Homeland Security
Now, the defense insists that “there is no Statute” regulating the figure of “the spouse” of the head of government to again criticize the interpretation and distinction the judge makes between private and institutional activities. Camacho emphasizes that following Peinado’s criterion would mean that the Moncloa service staff who cooked and served food to Gómez “would commit a crime of embezzlement.” “The instructor’s interpretation of this reality does not conform to the practices developed since the advent of Democracy,” he defends. The lawyer highlights that the Moncloa advisor who works with Gómez only helped her “occasionally” in certain matters related to her work at the Complutense “due to their friendship.” “But in no case were these matters managed exclusively by Cristina Álvarez,” he points out.
Besides denying influence peddling and embezzlement, he also dismisses business corruption. “No irregularity can be found if we consider that all the money contributions made to the chair by collaborating companies went into the university’s assets and not my client’s,” he notes.
He also rejects the charge of trademark misappropriation and emphasizes that the term Competitive Social Transformation was “invented” by Gómez. In this section, he insists that she “only” registered the website logo to “prevent it from being incorrectly used” and registered the domain “following instructions from the university itself.” “There is not the slightest evidential basis that my client has appropriated or profited from absolutely anything related to the Complutense University, nor that she has profited from anything appropriated by it,” he states.
Finally, the defense insists to the Madrid Court that, if it supports Peinado’s decision to act on these four crimes, it should prevent Gómez from being tried by a popular jury, considering that the legal requirements to use this formula are not met. In this regard, it argues that the appropriate thing would be for the trial to be held before a court composed of judges.
Provides a new email to rule out irregularities
Separately, Camacho has submitted to the case an email dated September 11, 2024, in which he informed the then Vice-Rector of Planning, Coordination, and Institutional Relations of the UCM, José María Coello de Portugal, that he would not renew the registration of the Internet domain transformatsc.es that supports the Social and Environmental Impact Measurement and Management Platform that was “under development.” At that time, it was to be renewed for the period between September 21, 2024, and September 20, 2025, but given “the administrative and judicial situation in which the extraordinary chair of Competitive Social Transformation is,” he stated that Gómez would not do so, leaving this procedure in the hands of the UCM.
Additionally, Gómez’s lawyer has attached to that email an invoice issued to his client shortly before, on July 23, 2024, for an amount of 30.25 euros, for the renewal of that registration for that period. The defense has filed this new appeal and this email after last Monday requesting Peinado to halt the case until the Madrid Court resolves the appeals on which it still has to rule.
Read more Cuba announces that it has exhausted all its fuel reserves: “We have absolutely nothing”
