A reform by Aznar facilitated the return of the magistrate investigating the Ceuta crisis, María Tardón, to the judiciary after her political career

Following the opening of an investigation into extraordinary crimes in our legal system, such as crimes against the peace and independence of the State, the magistrate is under scrutiny for her past as a political appointee with the PP. But not only has her performance as Third Deputy Mayor of Madrid been questioned, but also the good luck she had in rejoining the judiciary.

Under the presidency of José María Aznar, the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) changed the classification of this leave of absence from compulsory to voluntary, so the three-year waiting period to re-enter the Judicial Career ceased to exist. This reform was addressed in 2003 and Judge Tardón automatically re-entered in 2005. Currently, and after the 2024 reform of the LOPJ, a "cooling-off" period of two years is required, but without ceasing to receive full remuneration.

Although the cronyism and affinity of countless judges and prosecutors with the PP's circle are shameful, it cannot be overlooked that these revolving doors operate in all families. From current Ministers Marlaska and Margarita Robles, who seem to only have in common their leap into politics after a call from Pedro Sánchez; to magistrate Victoria Rosell, who made the inverse journey after being Government Delegate for Gender Violence.

It should be remembered that Judge Tardón was already recused during the 'Blesa case' for having been a member of the Caja Madrid Assembly, in application of the mechanism of art. 77 LOPJ, provided for extraordinary cases of this type. This sets a precedent of distrust towards the Magistrate that Pedro Sánchez himself has highlighted, although adding in an institutional tone that he fully trusts justice; the same justice that, as he himself has recognized, has surrounded his entire personal circle with procedures of dubious legal basis, with the obstinacy of judge Peinado being the best example.

Does this mean that Judge Tardón's impartiality is compromised? For now, she shows no signs of it, as nothing seems to point to any ideological interest in the few documents we know so far from her investigation. Furthermore, she also has no jurisdiction to prosecute government members, so her scope is very limited in that regard. However, her appearance of impartiality can be questioned, something not only superficial, but which the Supreme Court's jurisprudence has reiterated the need to "eliminate any appearance of partiality in order to promote the trust that judges and courts must inspire in a democratic society."