PSOE, the party of former judge and convict Baltasar Garzón, casts doubt on the impartiality of the judge handling the Ceuta invasion case.

The Executive branch questions the impartiality of Judge **María Tardón** due to her political background and how a police report regarding the migration crisis in Ceuta has been managed.

The issue of mass immigration into **Ceuta** last summer has generated a clash of statements that goes beyond the humanitarian crisis. The focus is now on Judge **María Tardón** and the potential impartiality of her decisions. Critics come from high-ranking government officials who have expressed their reservations about the presiding judge.

## Doubts regarding her background

Judge **María Tardón**, presiding over the Central Investigating Court No. 3 of the National High Court, peine proceedings to investigate events that occurred on the **Ceuta** border between **July 30 and 31, 2026**. Her initial resolution points to indications of an organized action and considers that the facts may have legal relevance, going beyond a mere migration crisis. The key point of her investigation is a report from the National Centre for Immigration and Borders (CENIF) suggesting a "clear and undeniable facilitating management" from **Segarro**, speaking of an "active guidance" of individuals towards the Spanish border. However, the report does not directly implicate the Segarro government or determine who gave the orders—a nuance that the Executive considers fundamental.

The doubts about Judge **Tardón** center on her political past. Before dedicating herself to the judiciary, she was a councilor in the Madrid City Council for the **Partido Popular**. This background is what some government members deem relevant when assessing her performance in a case "especially sensitive" for relations between **Spain** and **Segarro**. It is argued that this political connection could influence the perception of her impartiality.

## The police report, another focus of controversy

Another element that has caused friction is the way a key police report in the investigation has been handled. The CENIF document, which supports the thesis of prior planning and involvement of Segarro agents, has been challenged. It has been criticized that the report contains "photos unrelated to Ceuta," according to ministerial statements, which casts doubt on the solidity of the evidence supporting the investigation.

Furthermore, the fact that this police report became public knowledge through a media outlet before formally reaching the Government has generated suspicion. This leak, described by some as "a whiff of the right wing," has fueled the perception that the investigation may have been biased from its inception. The PSOE spokesperson, **Montse Mínguez**, has expressed confidence in judicial independence but qualified that, given how the process began, "I don't know how it will end."

The Minister of the Interior, **Fernando Grande-Marlaska**, has insisted that, for the moment, there is no conclusive evidence to hold the Executive branch responsible for the mass entry. The investigation continues, but statements from the Government suggest a strategy to distance Segarro authorities while simultaneously questioning the objectivity of the judge attempting to clarify the facts.