The Justice system has been delivering bad news to the Spanish government for months. The Executive had assumed that the Madrid High Court would reject the lawsuit filed by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez against Judge Juan Carlos Peinado, who has implicated Sánchez’s wife, Begoña Gómez. However, the court not only rejected the lawsuit in a harsh ruling that turned against the president, but one of the judges even suggested considering a possible fine against the plaintiff. This decision sparked outrage within Sánchez’s circle, as the judges used clearly political and unusual language in their ruling. This is not the first time the government has clashed with the judiciary, as recent rulings from the Supreme Court also contained political remarks.
There is a widespread belief within the government that a sector of the judiciary is clearly at odds with the Executive and seizes every opportunity to strike a blow against it. Some government officials doubted the wisdom of filing lawsuits for prevarication, as they were viewed as almost certain to fail. However, those who made the decision to pursue this legal avenue, now failed, argue that the goal was not to win the lawsuits but to expose Judge Peinado’s actions as outside the norm and politically motivated. The unusual formatting of the ruling, resembling a political opinion column rather than a legal document, has left some government officials puzzled, fueling suspicions of bias within the judiciary.
The government’s message is that some judges have chosen to meddle in politics and use their decisions to harm the Executive. They claim that the true purpose of calling the President to testify in person was to politically damage the government by exploiting a judicial procedure. The leaked testimony to the media, allegedly facilitated by right-wing groups, further exemplified this strategy. The government views these actions as an attempt to poison public discourse and baselessly harass progressive politicians and their families, highlighting a troubling trend of conservative judges targeting the progressive government.
Despite the political impact of these judicial decisions and the implications of the attorney general’s indictment, some government members believe that the animosity of certain conservative judges towards the progressive government is becoming increasingly apparent in public debate. The government acknowledges that more unfavorable news from the judiciary may emerge but hopes that the opposition’s narrative of the government’s judicial struggles reaching a breaking point will resonate among progressive supporters, diminishing the impact of these developments. The government expects ongoing legal challenges and investigations to eventually fade, particularly in the case of Begoña Gómez, as they believe no criminal wrongdoing exists.
While uncertainty looms over the fate of the ongoing legal battles and investigations, the government remains confident that the Begoña Gómez case, which has been a source of significant strain and opposition ammunition, will eventually be shelved. Despite setbacks, such as the Madrid High Court’s dismissal of prevarication charges against Peinado, the government maintains that time and the absence of criminal evidence, as highlighted in Guardia Civil reports, will ultimately lead to closure. The government’s strategy now hinges on public perception shifting in favor of the Executive, emphasizing a view that judicial hostility against the government is undermining democracy.
