Prosecutors seek acquittal of Begoña Gómez and her aide

The Madrid Provincial Prosecutor’s Office has requested the acquittal of Begoña Gómez and her aide, Cristina Álvarez, in the case that Judge Juan Carlos Peinado sent to trial before a jury. In its written closing arguments, the public prosecutor’s office states that the acts attributed to the defendants “do not constitute a criminal offence.”

The request concerns the charges of influence peddling and misappropriation of public funds attributed to Gómez, and the charge of misappropriation of public funds against Álvarez. It is not a judicial ruling and does not bring the proceedings to an end: the judicial authorities must decide the outstanding issues and, if applicable, the outcome of the trial.

The Prosecutor’s Office’s arguments

Regarding Gómez’s work at the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), the Prosecutor’s Office maintains that co-directing the endowed chair was unpaid and that no university degree was required to hold the position. Regarding the software developed in that context, it states that it was funded by private companies and that ownership belonged to the university. It adds that there is no evidence of any financial benefit to the defendants or financial harm to the UCM.

The public prosecutor’s office also rejects the claim that Gómez’s work at the university proves influence peddling. Among its arguments, it points out that she was already working in the private sector before Pedro Sánchez became Prime Minister and that she had previously had a professional relationship with the Complutense.

As for Cristina Álvarez, the Prosecutor’s Office argues that her appointment as a temporary, trusted member of staff was for the purpose of providing logistical and organizational support to the president’s wife. It considers that the actions questioned by the judge do not establish the improper use of public funds or any additional benefit for the aide.

The request does not anticipate the ruling

The Prosecutor’s Office’s position differs from that of the investigating judge. Peinado argued that Gómez had allegedly used her proximity to the president to advance her professional profile, and that Álvarez had allegedly supported activities unrelated to her official duties. That position led to the opening of a jury trial, but it does not constitute a conviction.

Nor do all the parties bringing accusations share the public prosecutor’s office’s request. According to the information available, the private prosecution led by Hazte Oír is seeking prison sentences for both women; the defense teams, for their part, are seeking acquittal. These positions will have to be considered during the proceedings.

Next procedural steps

Following the submission of the Prosecutor’s Office’s closing arguments, the parties have 15 days to enter an appearance before the Madrid Provincial Court and raise preliminary matters. The newly appointed judge must then rule on them and specify the facts that, if applicable, will be the subject of the trial. The hearing date and the composition of the jury are still pending.

The case began in April 2024 following a complaint by Manos Limpias. The investigation focused, among other matters, on the Complutense chair and Álvarez’s duties, with her position being paid for with public funds. The request for acquittal sets out the position of the public prosecutor’s office, but the proceedings continue, and the request alone does not determine the court’s decision.