Sumar questions the nine-year disqualification of David Sánchez and sends a warning to judges: "They make it very difficult to believe in the Rule of Law"

Sumar has reacted harshly to the conviction of nine years of disqualification imposed on David Sánchez, brother of the President of the Government, for his participation as a necessary cooperator in a crime of administrative prevarication. The party considers that the sentence issued by the Provincial Court of Badajoz is excessive and warns of the consequences that this type of resolution has on citizens' trust in judicial institutions.

"They have to be careful not to overdo it. They are making it very difficult to believe in the Rule of Law in this country," said Alberto Ibáñez, Compromís deputy integrated into the Sumar parliamentary group. The leader has defined the nine years of disqualification as an "authentic disproportion" and a "warning to sailors" that, in his opinion, transcends the specific procedure against the musician.

Aina Vidal, deputy spokesperson for the plurinational group and deputy for Catalunya en Comú, has shared this diagnosis. Vidal has stated that the opinion of Spaniards about Justice is "disastrous" and has linked this deterioration to sentences such as the one known this Tuesday and to the treatment that Begoña Gómez is receiving from Judge Juan Carlos Peinado.

A sentence that will be appealed

The First Section of the Badajoz Court has sentenced David Sánchez to nine years of special disqualification from public employment or office and from standing as a candidate in elections. The court considers him a necessary cooperator in a prevarication related to the modification of the position he held within the Provincial Council. The resolution is free of prison sentences and can still be appealed, a path that the defense has already announced it will use.

The procedure examined the creation in 2017 of the position of coordinator of conservatory activities, its award to David Sánchez, and the subsequent transformation of the position into head of the Office of Performing Arts. The magistrates maintain that a plan was developed from the high instances of the Provincial Council to favor him, although the sentence itself admits that it has not been proven who initially made the decision or if there were pressures from Pedro Sánchez or people linked to his environment.

The ruling also imposes on Miguel Ángel Gallardo, former president of the Provincial Council of Badajoz and former leader of the Extremaduran PSOE, two sentences of nine years of disqualification for as many crimes of prevarication. Several officials and heads of the provincial institution have also received convictions for their participation in the various administrative procedures analyzed.

The case went to trial driven by the popular accusation of Manos Limpias after the Public Prosecutor's Office requested dismissal during the preliminary phase. The Prosecutor's Office subsequently maintained that the evidence presented was insufficient to convict and demanded David Sánchez's acquittal, a position shared by his defense.

Sumar focuses on proportionality

The reaction of the minority partner of the Executive has focused on the harshness of the penalty and on the accumulated effect that certain procedures are having on the image of Justice. Sumar avoids questioning the ability of the courts to investigate possible irregularities, but maintains that the criminal response must bear a reasonable relationship with the proven facts and with the specific intervention of each accused.

Ibáñez has insisted that a nine-year disqualification sentence requires especially solid grounds. His warning is directed at the risk that a resolution perceived as excessive fuels the idea that a person's surname or their family relationship with a political leader influences the intensity of the judicial response.

The Government has stated that it respects the sentence, although it disagrees with its content and maintains David Sánchez's innocence. The Executive's spokesperson, Elma Saiz, has recalled that the Prosecutor's Office requested acquittal and that the procedure originated from a complaint filed by a far-right organization. Moncloa trusts that higher instances will review the ruling when the defense formalizes its appeal.

The resolution has provoked an opposite response in the PP and the far-right Vox, who have presented it as proof of corruption within the president's family environment. Sumar thus distances itself from its socialist partners by formulating its own criticism, focused on the disproportion of the sentence and the institutional wear and tear caused by certain judicial actions.

Sumar accuses Peinado of "misogyny" against Begoña Gómez

Aina Vidal's criticisms link with the reaction that Sumar has maintained this Tuesday regarding the latest decision by the controversial judge Juan Carlos Peinado. The magistrate has granted Begoña Gómez five days to prove that she used her passport solely during the trip to London that had been authorized by the court to attend her daughter's graduation.

Peinado made the request after verifying that the document submitted by Gómez lacked physical entry or exit stamps. The defense maintains that the trip occurred within the permitted dates and that British border controls are carried out using electronic systems, so the absence of marks on the passport is common. The judge has warned that he could consider a possible breach of the precautionary measure if the trip is not justified.

The Minister of Culture and spokesperson for Movimiento Sumar, Ernest Urtasun, has described the action as "absolutely lamentable, out of place, and an attack on the president's inner circle by attacking his wife". Parliamentary spokesperson Verónica Martínez Barbero has spoken directly of "misogyny" and "machismo," while Alberto Ibáñez sees a disproportionate decision that reflects "political and gender violence."

Sumar understands that the demand addressed to Gómez once again places on her the obligation to clear up any suspicion generated during the investigation. The president's wife now has five days to present the documentation of her trip to London to the court.