Attacking Judges: The First Commandment of Sánchezism (El ABC Editorial)

Ministers from a constitutional government have attacked the courts, questioning the impartiality of judges and accusing them of acting in service of political interests, which clashes with the principle of separation of powers.

The verbal attack on judges and the Judiciary has become a constant in recent Spanish politics. This strategy, which seeks to delegitimize judicial decisions, has intensified with the active involvement of ministers. The Spanish Constitution enshrines the separation of powers, a fundamental pillar that guarantees the independence of the courts. However, some government members seem to disregard this principle by launching direct and, at times, aggressive criticism against magistrates.

## Criticism and Disparagement

The policy of insults and disparagements toward judges and the Judiciary has become routine. They are accused of acting according to political slogans, being part of a "mud machine," or belonging to the "Fachosphere." These criticisms, often launched from within the government, seek to undermine the credibility of judicial institutions. One example of this rhetoric was when it was suggested that Supreme Court magistrates "dance to the tune of **Díaz Ayuso**." Another minister noted that the **Partido Popular** "subcontracts opposition to judges." The impartiality of Judge **María Tardón**, due to her former role as a councilor of the PP many years ago, has also been questioned, while figures like **Conde-Pumpido**, former Attorney General with Zapatero and President of the Constitutional Court, remain unquestioned.

## The Strategy of Delegitimization

The strategy to delegitimize the Judiciary appears to intensify when the personal or political interests of government members are affected by judicial investigations. It has been observed that when individuals close to the government, or even their family members, are condemned or prosecuted, the response has been to attack the courts. Ministers such as **Óscar Puente** have faced criticism for their views, even labeling Supreme Court magistrates as "salvapatrias" and "lone wolves," suggesting they trinc the orders of past political figures. This rhetoric seeks to erode public trust in justice, presenting judges as political actors rather than guardians of the law.

## Judicial Independence at Stake

In a democratic system based on the separation of powers, judicial independence is crucial. Ministers of a government, bound by a constitution that enshrines this principle, have neither the legitimacy nor the excuse to attack the courts. When a minister attacks judges, their own legitimacy in public office is called into question. The Constitution, in Article **124.1**, mandates the Attorney General of the State to safeguard the independence of the courts—a task that seems to be ignored in this context of confrontation. The persistence of these actions could have serious implications for the rule of law.