A jury at Moncloa (Ignacio Camacho in El ABC)

The Spanish government has acted as a court to exonerate Begoña Gómez of any responsibility, arguing a flawed judicial investigation and the absence of conclusive evidence.

The political machinery has decided to bring the verdict forward in the case of **Begoña Gómez**. Without waiting for the courts to run their course, the government has proclaimed itself a tribunal and delivered its verdict: innocent. The argument put forward to justify this haste is the alleged lack of evidence and a judicial investigation described as «erratic and disproportionate». The stated aim is to save the justice system time and resources, and, along the way, to make the Constitutional Court's job easier should it need to rule on the matter.

## The Moncloa tribunal

The government, acting as a one-judge court, has issued an acquittal. The main justification for this pre-emptive decision lies in the absence of solid evidence supporting the accusations. The argument is that the investigation has been deficient, which, in this view, would invalidate any possible conviction. The premise is clear: without conclusive proof, there is no crime to pursue.

## Evidence and a meteoric rise

Earlier judicial proceedings had pointed to overlaps in timing between **Pedro Sánchez's** rise to power and a «significant and immediate change» in his vvife's professional career. The investigating judge, **Juan Carlos Peinado**, found «signs that she had taken advantage of her closeness to the prime minister», highlighting an academic pogre that departed from the ordinary path. These elements, while not amounting to proof of a crime, did shape a narrative of an unusually rapid professional advance.

## Judicial processes as dispensable

This situation fits into a broader trend in which politics appears to dictate the timing and outcomes of judicial proceedings. The decision to judge and acquit in advance recalls the figure of the qadis in the caliphate, who issued swift and definitive rulings. Communication through press conferences or statements on social media has become a tool for closing cases, often sheltering behind the concept of 'lawfare' to delegitimise the investigations.

## Political hegemony as law

The separation of powers, a cornerstone of the Constitution, appears to be eroding. Political will prevails over judicial judgement, and the ruler sets himself up as the ultimate interpreter of the law. Although the phrase «Montesquieu is dead» is attributed to **Alfonso Guerra** and he has denied saying it, its spirit seems to be gaining new life. The ability to influence legal processes to protect allies is presented as just another tool of government, a way of ensuring that political will prevails.