The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) has activated the disciplinary mechanism before Judge Juan Carlos Peinado after receiving three complaints for his way of instructing two cases with political repercussion. The disciplinary authority has opened proceedings to determine whether the magistrate incurred errors or excesses in the procedures against Begoña Gómez, wife of the President of the Government, and against a high position of the Madrid City Council.
In the case against the wife of the chief executive, the complaint is based on the Minister of Justice, Félix Bolaños, who denounced that the judge had acted “irregular” when he interrogated him as a witness in that case and when, later, he asked the Supreme Court to open a cause against him. In relation to the head of the Madrid City Council, the initiative starts from Más Madrid and the deputy of the PSOE Guillermo Hita, who denounced a “neglect of their judicial obligations” because it dictated with two months of delay an extension in the case of alleged embezzlement of the manager of the Municipal Transport Company (EMT) payable for paying an exorbitant price for an act to OKDIARY.
The government's governing body has competencies to demand disciplinary responsibility to judges and magistrates if their conduct deviates from a series of principles priced among which are independence, impartiality or respect for the parties. The sanctions for offenses committed in the exercise of their positions can go from simple warnings or economic fines to forced transfers, suspensions and expulsions.
Organ sources explain that the opening of informative proceedings is only a first step, which can derive or not in the opening of a disciplinary file and in a hypothetical sanction. They open every time a complaint is received, which are more than fifty per year. This opening of proceedings follows a first procedure destined to verify the veracity of the facts reported. Then, the promoter will have to decide whether to propose the opening of a file and transfer to the Disciplinary Commission or if, on the contrary, file the proceedings, which requires the examination of the Permanent Commission.
In 2023, the last year of which there is data, 540 informative proceedings were opened, according to the memory of the Disciplinary Actions Unit. In addition, 24 disciplinary files began, which do not have to correspond to proceedings of that same year. Half of the files were initiated by the neglect or the unjustified and repeated delay in the initiation, processing or resolution of procedures. This is precisely the precept invoked in the case of extension to the investigation to the high position of the Madrid City Council, which is at the moment filed due to that error of the magistrate.
In matters of media or special interest, how “first” it is done is to contact the judge himself or magistrate and is advanced by email or by the most effective means that the content of the agreement is opened by which the proceedings are opened, according to the aforementioned memory. In fact, it was the hairstyle who revealed in a recent car that had opened some informative proceedings, since it is a reserved procedure.
In 2023, the average process of processing an informative diligence, from the opening to the opening of the file or the file, was 56 days. However, in some recent matters such as the investigation of Judge Manuel Ruiz de Lara, a repeat offenses in his offenses to Sánchez; or Judge Adolfo Carretero for his controversial interrogation to actress Elisa Mouliaá reveals that this period has been widely exceeded. In addition, in case of opening of the file, its execution is extended, on average, for 104 days. The hairstyle is scheduled for September 2026, so some sources doubt that the procedure, in case of opening file, can be concluded.
The interrogation of Bolaños
In any case, the opening of the proceedings will force the CGPJ to analyze whether the magistrate departed from the limits marked by the disciplinary regulation in these two procedures. In the case of Bolaños, Fuentes of the Ministry of Justice explain that these complaints were referred to inform about the “irregularities” committed by judge “in relation to their statement as a witness and the subsequent reasoned presentation elevated to the Supreme Court.”
During the interrogation, the judge accused the minister of answering with “evasive” and allowed himself to question any of his gestures. “I don't know what you can give you a smile,” he said. Then, the judge misrepresented the minister's testimony to underpin his request to the Supreme Court to open a cause against him. The promoter of the disciplinary action, Ricardo Conde, agreed to open an informative diligence against the magistrate after receiving on June 4 a first complaint of Bolaños in relation to the judge's performance during the interrogation. On July 29, the minister filed a second complaint after the Supreme Court rejected investigate.
The aforementioned sources of justice underline that the will of the minister has been not to make any of these writings public “since their purpose is that these complaints can help to continue behaviors and actions that damage the reputation and good name of justice, whose guarantor is the CGPJ.” This Friday, Bolaños himself claimed to the CGPJ to “purify the responsibilities” that they can be derived from the facts denounced and let the judges' governing body work.
An out -of -term extension
The other complaints presented are motivated by the fact that Peinado issued an extension in a case of alleged embezzlement that affects Alfonso Sánchez Vicente, which as an EMT manager is a high position of the administration directed by José Luis Martínez-Almeida (PP). Hajinado investigated since 2023 if that municipal company embezzled public money by signing a sponsorship contract with OKDIARIO for sustainability days in 2022 for 72,600 euros when a year earlier a similar event had cost a quarter, as denounced by Podemos.
The Provincial Court of Madrid found that hairstyle extended the cause two months after the legal limit and that many proceedings, therefore, were not valid as they have been agreed outside the deadline. The combing response was to file the case, but not because his mistake would have condemned the investigation to dismissal, but because he believed that there was no crime in the agreement signed between the City Council and the Eduardo Inda website. According to the judge, the event was followed by “a large number of people” and that “greater dissemination” was able to justify overpricing. We can and more Madrid have resorted to the file.
However, the spokeswoman for the Most Madrid Municipal Group, Rita Maestre, also chose to open the disciplinary route and presented on July 3 a complaint against hairstyle in relation to these facts. The disciplinary authority agreed to open proceedings five days later. Subsequently, on July 18, the deputy of the PSOE Guillermo Hita filed another complaint for the same events that led to another opening of proceedings on July 31. The two complaints consider that he combined his judicial obligations disregarded when agreeing that extension out of time despite the petition of popular accusations and the Prosecutor's Office.
In their writings, both complainants underline that the judge's action has caused “serious damages” to the investigation and the accusations and a “clear favor” to the defenses of the investigated by preventing continuing to investigate and carry out proceedings that would have led to a “complete clarification of the facts.” The facts are now in the hands of the Disciplinary Authority of the CGPJ.
