The Madrid Audience, a provincial-level appeals court, has endorsed the investigation of Begoña Gómez, the wife of Pedro Sánchez, for influence peddling and corruption in business activities, following the complaint lodged more than a month ago by the far-right pressure group Manos Limpias ("Clean Hands"). The court rejected the appeal by public prosecutors against the opening of proceedings arguing that the original complaint by Manos Limpias sets out "sufficient objective data to legitimize the start of the investigation". The court's ruling maintains that in order to admit a complaint the "plausibility" and "the mere well-founded possibility" of a claim are sufficient, since the opposite would lead to "the absurdity of only being able to initiate investigative proceedings for actions that contain a high likelihood of conviction”, which would “distort” the investigative function of the initial phase of the process. As well, the ruling is highly critical of the appeal presented by the public prosecutors: "The intention of the Prosecutor's Office to prevent any investigation in this delicate field is unusual and could lead to the creation of areas of impunity in all criminal activity where delimitation of criminally significant behaviour is not always easy to establish", it argues. And the text reiterates that, initially, "a suspicion based on objective and verifiable data must be enough" to open an investigation.
The decision, signed by judges María del Rosario Esteban, Jesús Gómez-Angulo and Enrique Jesús Bergés, states that Begoña Gómez "could be using her status as the wife of the Spanish prime minister to offer her personal influence in recommending the awarding of substantial public procurement contracts in favour of certain companies which, at the same time, give her support, advantage or benefit in the exponential development of her professional career”. Specifically, it points to the assistance to the joint venture set up by Innove Next and The Valley Business School: in this case, the judges believe that the complaint presents "sufficiently objective data to legitimize the start of the investigation" and provides "objectives indications that point to intermediation in the granting of subsidies in which some type of compensation could have been involved". An "activity that legitimizes an investigation", they state.
On the other hand, the judges consider that the content of the Manos Limpias complaint becomes "a little disjointed" and they question the accusations referring to the financial rescue of the Globalia foundation. They consider that, on this matter, the narrative is "unbelievable" and contains "erroneous data", since Begoña Gómez's connection with the events is "simple conjecture beyond striking temporal and personal coincidences".
Prosecutors' claim could lead to "the creation of areas of impunity"
The Madrid Audience ruling also strongly questions the intention of the public prosecutors in calling for the shelving of proceedings. The prosecutors' appeal "cannot be accepted, since neither are the facts contemplated manifestly false, nor can the appearance of a crime be completely ruled out, without an investigation that provides knowledge of all the concurrent circumstances", argue the judges. And they reject the "attempt" by the prosecutors "to prevent all investigation" in this "delicate field", a claim which they consider to be "unusual" and which "could lead to the creation of areas of impunity in all criminal activity" since "the delimitation of criminally significant behaviour is not always easy to establish" and "obtaining sources of evidence is complex”.
In its appeal, the prosecutors had argued that there were no indications of a crime that would justify the opening of criminal proceedings and pointed out that the original court decision to open the investigation "lacks any legal reasoning" on whether the facts set out "bring together, at least indicatively, the elements of a defined crime". In addition, they pointed out that Manos Limpias's text limited itself to considering that the matter "deserves to be investigated" and intends to initiate an investigation based on "mere hypotheses or pure and simple suspicion".
Manos Limpias acknowledged the possibility of 'fake news'
In addition to all this, shortly after the judge accepted the Manos Limpias complaint, the extremist pressure group acknowledged in a statement that its text could have been based on fake news. However, far from making any rectification, the group washed its hands of this possibility and argued that "it will be the judge who will have to check whether these journalistic reports are true or not". The complaint stated that, after reading what some media had published about Begoña Gómez and, having noted that "the public prosecutors were not acting ex officio, even though the aforementioned news had been published for weeks", Manos Limpias decided to lodge its complaint.
In addition, investigation by the Spanish Civil Guard did not find any evidence of influence peddling in the businesses of Begoña Gómez. The investigating group concluded that Pedro Sánchez's wife had no involvement in the rescue of Air Europa by the Spanish government during the pandemic, nor did it receive any public subsidy, thus contradicting all the information provided by Manos Limpias in its complaint.