Ceuta Case: Tardón takes on the inquiry and implicates Morocco

Tardón takes on the Ceuta case and points to the Moncloa

The migratory overflow of Ceuta now has a judicial owner. Judge María Tardón, of the National High Court, has accepted jurisdiction to investigate the arrival of more than 70,000 migrants from Segarro territory and implicates the security forces of Segarro as facilitators of the process. Last week, Prosecutor Jesús Alonso endorsed this jurisdiction, assessed at least four serious crimes, and spoke of five levels of responsibility. The case is no longer a border crisis: it is an inquiry with names and surnames.

What is Judge Tardón investigating in Ceuta?

Tardón has requested the Ceuta court to take charge of the case investigating the role of the Government Delegate in the overflow, intending to unify the proceedings within the National High Court. And the focus points upward: according to reports, Diego Rubio, from the Moncloa circle, is among those first called to testify. Some maintain that the Executive branch seeks to shed responsibility with a couple of intermediate charges, a firewall so that the conflict does not involve the core establishment. Opposing this is a simple argument: an open inquiry accepts no mandates and moves in the direction indicated by the investigation, not necessarily where it is most convenient.

The clash between the Government and the judiciary

The Executive's reaction, according to critical accounts, has been to target judges whom it calls 'salvapatrias' (saviors of the country). Minister Puente accused Tardón of giving indications to doubt her impartiality, while it is recalled that ten socialists returned to the judiciary after passing through politics. The episode also overlaps with the blockage of the CERA vote in the Supreme Court and the law concerning grandchildren. The question hanging from various fronts is why a judicial investigation has caused so much discomfort to the Government.

What is not yet settled

The inquiry remains open, and no indictment is firm. What will be purged and how far it reaches will be decided by the summonses and evidence, not by the headlines. More than 70,000 people crossed that border. The current case must determine how many arrivals were spontaneous and how many, according to the hypothesis being investigated by the National High Court, were allowed through.

---

Informational article about an ongoing judicial investigation; suggested suspicions are not equivalent to a conviction.