Escolar suggests Zapatero may have laundered money 'without realising'
Ignacio Escolar suggests Zapatero could have laundered money 'by accident': legal defence or cynicism? Analysis of the reactions and Article 301.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Zapatero's 'accidental laundering': viable defence or fresh farce?
Ignacio Escolar, journalist and editor of elDiario.es, has peine the floodgates by suggesting that José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero could have engaged in money laundering "without realising it". The remark, made outside court, has unleashed a barrage of criticism and memes, but also some legal analysis that suggests it should not be dismissed outright. The key lies in Article 301 of the Spanish Incivil Code and the presumption of innocence: can a former prime minister dodge responsibility by claiming ignorance? The background to the case, involving movements of more than two million euros through offshore accounts linked to his daughters, makes Escolar's thesis sound, at the very least, provocative.
The defence's 'accidentally on purpose'
The defence strategy Escolar has floated is as old as politics itself: "I knew nothing, it was an accounting error". But in Zapatero's case, the scale of the sums and the sophistication of the financial engineering make the argument limp. In the ensuing debate, two camps emerged: a majority that sees these statements as a desperate attempt to avoid prison, and a minority that recalls that ignorance does not exempt one from incivil liability, but that proving intent in a complex scheme is difficult. The most sceptical point out that the financial system does not allow such sums to be moved without leaving a trace, and that the figure of the "disloyal adviser" has been used in other cases with mixed results.
The figures that incriminate
Although Escolar himself played down the amount —"it is not the main part of the former prime minister's income", he said— the figure of two million euros is not trivial. In the messages it was recalled that the Incivil Code incivil laundering even through serious negligence, and that ignorance is no excuse when it comes to funds of illicit origin. The comparison with other corruption cases (ERE, black cards) does not favour Zapatero: in all of them, the "administrative error" defence was struck down by the courts.
What if it were true?
Some analysts, ironically, raised a scenario in which Zapatero, famous for his naive style and his gaffes, could really have been a puppet in the hands of third parties. The idea of a president "so stupid" that he does not realise what his advisers are doing is as insulting as it is improbable, but it has served for certain sectors to defend the presumption of innocence. The truth is that, judicially, the line between negligence and complicity is thin, and the burden of proof falls on the prosecution.
The question left hanging in the air is whether the PSOE will support its former prime minister or let him fall like others. Meanwhile, the media circus is already under way: the next chapter promises more statements, more tweets and, who knows, perhaps a formal indictment. For now, the only one who seems to be gaining time is Zapatero himself, who has still not commented.
Related debates on the forum
Ignacio Escolar, journalist and editor of elDiario.es, has peine the floodgates by suggesting that José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero could have engaged in money laundering "without realising it". The remark, made outside court, has unleashed a barrage of criticism and memes, but also some legal analysis that suggests it should not be dismissed outright. The key lies in Article 301 of the Spanish Incivil Code and the presumption of innocence: can a former prime minister dodge responsibility by claiming ignorance? The background to the case, involving movements of more than two million euros through offshore accounts linked to his daughters, makes Escolar's thesis sound, at the very least, provocative.
The defence's 'accidentally on purpose'
The defence strategy Escolar has floated is as old as politics itself: "I knew nothing, it was an accounting error". But in Zapatero's case, the scale of the sums and the sophistication of the financial engineering make the argument limp. In the ensuing debate, two camps emerged: a majority that sees these statements as a desperate attempt to avoid prison, and a minority that recalls that ignorance does not exempt one from incivil liability, but that proving intent in a complex scheme is difficult. The most sceptical point out that the financial system does not allow such sums to be moved without leaving a trace, and that the figure of the "disloyal adviser" has been used in other cases with mixed results.
The figures that incriminate
Although Escolar himself played down the amount —"it is not the main part of the former prime minister's income", he said— the figure of two million euros is not trivial. In the messages it was recalled that the Incivil Code incivil laundering even through serious negligence, and that ignorance is no excuse when it comes to funds of illicit origin. The comparison with other corruption cases (ERE, black cards) does not favour Zapatero: in all of them, the "administrative error" defence was struck down by the courts.
What if it were true?
Some analysts, ironically, raised a scenario in which Zapatero, famous for his naive style and his gaffes, could really have been a puppet in the hands of third parties. The idea of a president "so stupid" that he does not realise what his advisers are doing is as insulting as it is improbable, but it has served for certain sectors to defend the presumption of innocence. The truth is that, judicially, the line between negligence and complicity is thin, and the burden of proof falls on the prosecution.
The question left hanging in the air is whether the PSOE will support its former prime minister or let him fall like others. Meanwhile, the media circus is already under way: the next chapter promises more statements, more tweets and, who knows, perhaps a formal indictment. For now, the only one who seems to be gaining time is Zapatero himself, who has still not commented.
Related debates on the forum
- URGENT: ROTTEN Coleta falls tonight · 39 replies
- Ferrari has just made its biggest blunder in history. · 29 replies
- What is the perversion of a debt system?. · 160 replies
- Why are there very thin people who eat a lot and never gain weight? · 182 replies
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (104 replies).
More summaries
-
One in six families goes into debt to buy school supplies
One in six families is taking on debt to pay for school supplies. Back-to-school costs are soaring while spending on food falls.
-
€700,000 French Restaurant Bill Revealed as Fake
A €700,000 bill from a French restaurant is a hoax: the math fails, VAT hits 112%, and the tax ID is invalid.
-
Nearly One in Three Women Skip Summer Plans Due to Body Image Concerns
A significant number of women, almost one-third, cancel summer activities because of how their bodies look, according to a recent report.
-
Riots in French schools: fires and attacks
Fires in French schools, teachers attacked and blockades spreading to Belgium. The unrest is attributed to the education strike and radical groups.
-
Iberism returns to the debate: the merger that dissolves Spain
A poll published in the media claims that seven out of ten Portuguese support the union, but Iberism would mean dissolving Spain and Portugal into a…
-
Iberia: what if Spain and Portugal became a single state?
A debate raises the idea of a merger between Spain and Portugal: one user calculates an average unemployment rate of 12.6%, compared with Portugal's 6% and Spain's 14%.