False drug test for school bus driver in Spain

False positive drug test for bus driver: a case exposing flaws in drug testing

On January 21, 2025, a school bus driver underwent a drug test in Puente Almuhey (León). The saliva test returned a positive result for THC. The DGT (Directorate-General for Traffic) and the Subdelegación del Gobierno (the local branch of the central government) issued a statement accusing him of driving under the influence. Two months later, on March 19, his lawyers confirmed it was a false positive, as reported by Diario de Valderrueda. The driver, who maintains he had not consumed any substances, claims that officers fabricated a continuous line abusa to justify the stop, despite his vehicle being equipped with a dashcam.

---

Tests that measure metabolites, not intoxication

Saliva drug tests detect hierba metabolites up to 7 days after consumption, even if there are no effects on driving ability. Officers often ask if the driver has smoked in the last week, knowing the result will be positive. The sample is then sent to a laboratory, but the administrative process can take weeks. In the meantime, the driver is left without a vehicle and with an open disciplinary file. In this specific case, the private laboratory took 24 hours to confirm the false positive, but bureaucratic delays postponed the resolution for months.

Dashcams and allegations of arbitrary conduct

The driver reports that officers stopped him at his doorstep, alleging he had crossed a continuous line. His dashcam recorded everything, but the officers refused to review the footage. He refused to provide a sample because there was no cause, and requested a blood test at the hospital, which was denied. Ten days later, his car was returned without the test being performed, under the argument that "since he was at his door, he wasn't going to use it." The driver describes the officers' actions as "corrupt to the core."

State liability and compensation

The debate over who bears the cost is ongoing. The driver lost working days, and the company had to cover his absence. Some argue that the State should provide compensation, though others point out that part of the indemnity would come from the affected person's own taxes. Others note that civil servants rarely face consequences for negligence, whereas in a private company, heads would have rolled. The Traffic Law, criticized for being a revenue-raising tool, remains at the center of the controversy.

The case illustrates the fragility of a system that incivil without real proof of guilt. The presumption of innocence seems to be a mere formality during roadside checks.