David Sánchez sentenced to 9 years for prevarication in Badajoz

The Badajoz Court has sentenced David Sánchez, brother of the Spanish Prime Minister, to nine years of special disqualification from public office for prevarication. The ruling, which imposes no prison term or repayment of nearly 400,000 euros, also affects former PSOE leader Miguel Ángel Gallardo and eight other officials. The verdict is not final and opens the way to a lengthy judicial appeal process.

David Sánchez sentenced: nine years of disqualification for prevarication

The Badajoz Court has issued a ruling in the case involving David Sánchez, brother of the Prime Minister, who was tried for prevarication and influence peddling. The tribunal imposes nine years of special disqualification from public employment or office, but no prison. He is also not required to repay the salaries earned since 2017 as coordinator of the conservatories of the Badajoz Provincial Council, a position created specifically for him, according to the prosecution. The former president, Miguel Ángel Gallardo, was sentenced to the same penalty, as were eight other officials who assisted in the hiring.

The court found it proven that the position was designed exclusively for David Sánchez, who did not meet the requirements or present the qualifications supposedly entitling him. However, the tribunal did not find influence peddling, an aspect the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt. The verdict is not final: an appeal can be filed with the High Court of Justice of Extremadura and, subsequently, with the Supreme Court. This detail, omitted in some initial reports, is crucial: the process could drag on for years, and in the worst-case scenario for the prosecution, the conviction could be annulled.

The shadow of influence peddling: who pulled the strings?

One of the most striking aspects of the ruling is the acquittal for influence peddling. The prosecution argued that the involvement of high PSOE circles, possibly the Prime Minister himself, in creating the position was evident. However, the court applied the principle "in dubio pro reo" and did not consider that pressure proven. The question remains: if Gallardo prevaricated to place Pedro Sánchez's brother, did he act on his own initiative or under external instructions? The Prosecution failed to prove the connection, but the judicial narrative leaves the intrigue open.

Public money: no repayment or prison

The absence of repayment of the estimated 400,000 euros has generated understandable outrage. Legally, only direct victims—here, the Badajoz Provincial Council—can claim this amount through civil proceedings, and the Prosecution did not request it in the incivil trial. The result is that the convicted man keeps the money, at least for now. The disqualification penalty, though serious, does not prevent David Sánchez from working in the private sector or in public companies not subject to this restriction, according to some interpretations. The revolving door remains open.

The sense of impunity runs through the debate: for a citizen without connections, a prevarication conviction usually means the end of their professional career. For the Prime Minister's brother, the disqualification may be merely a nine-year inconvenience, after which the reassignment machinery could start working again. Meanwhile, procedural costs have been set at only 50%, another gesture fueling resentment.

A long judicial path full of uncertainty

The Badajoz Court's ruling is a first-instance judgment. David Sánchez's defense has already announced an appeal, and the process could reach the Supreme Court. If it drags on long enough, it will coincide with election cycles and could be used as political ammunition by both sides. Time favors the convicted: the longer the process lasts, the harder it will be to maintain the disqualification in case of revocation. Justice, in this case, moves slowly.

The prevarication conviction is a incivil fact, but its effectiveness depends on its finality. In Spain, non-final rulings are systematically appealed, and this case will be no exception. The question is whether public opinion will maintain focus during the years the judicial process will likely last. For now, the headline is unequivocal: the Prime Minister's brother is, for all legal purposes, a prevaricator. But the fine print—nine years, no jail, no repayment—diminishes the impact of a ruling that, for many, tastes like too little.