Extremadura President's Brother Gets 9-Year Ban, No Prison

9-year ban, zero jail time: the sentence for Extremadura’s president’s brother

The brother of the president of Extremadura has been sentenced to nine years of disqualification from public office for the crime of *prevaricación* (administrative abuse of power). The ruling does not include imprisonment—since this offense carries no custodial sentence—nor does it order the return of money collected over several years. Debate continues across the political spectrum on whether this penalty is sufficient or merely a superficial fix.

Why is there no prison time for administrative abuse?

Spain’s Penal Code punishes *prevaricación administrativa* solely with disqualification. As noted during the trial, this is a specific offense committed only by public officials, and its penalty is fixed: suspension from employment or public office. Imprisonment is not provided for, an anomaly that neither the PP nor the PSOE has corrected. The rationale is that the protected legal interest is the proper functioning of the Administration, not property rights. In practice, however, the message is clear: abusing one’s position through nepotism has limited consequences.

No repayment of funds

One of the most controversial aspects of the ruling is that it does not require restitution of amounts fraudulently received over the years. The convicted individual, who was placed in a public post without meeting the requirements, even registered his residence in Portugal to evade income tax (*IRPF*), according to court proceedings. The Tax Agency failed to act in time, and the court imposed no fines or compensation. Legal sources indicate that the only way to recover the money would be through asset liability proceedings against those who appointed him.

Political context and harassment of the judge

This case is not isolated. Alongside the convicted man, another suspect, Gallardo, has received a double disqualification sentence—up to 18 years—for two counts of *prevaricación*. Gallardo, who distanced himself from the regional PSOE, held a position in a town hall before moving to the provincial council. The investigating judge faced pressure: she was trinc, and her young children were approached. This harassment, reported by the court, contrasts sharply with the minimal political fallout from the conviction.

Outlook: appeal and potential reappointment

The ruling is not final. An appeal can be filed with the Supreme Court, but analysts note that disqualification sentences are typically upheld without increase. Meanwhile, the convicted individual could potentially be reassigned to state-owned enterprises or public sector entities—such as SEPI—where the disqualification might not directly apply. The sense of impunity is reinforced by timing: the verdict coincided with a World Cup semi-final, diluting media attention.

The outcome remains uncertain. Unless the Supreme Court decides to tighten its criteria—which is rare for these offenses—it is likely the convict will enjoy a public pension before the disqualification period ends. Though surprises always remain possible.