Sánchez's brother claims he found his public job via Google

Sánchez's brother says he found his job through Google

David Sánchez told the judge he located the vacancy for his position at the Office of Performing Arts within the Badajoz Provincial Council by searching on Google. He could not describe the physical location of that office. Nor did he know the names or roles of his coworkers. Or the exact nature of his work. The sequence of answers, reported by various media outlets, turned a judicial appearance into a portrait of a post that, according to available data, existed only on paper.

The contrast between what he earns and what he knows sparked public debate. 48,000 euros annually, remote work from Portugal, and seven years without setting foot in the office, according to circulating data. The judge asked about the physical location of the workplace. The answer was that he couldn't say.

What is the Office of Performing Arts and who runs it?

It is the unit David Sánchez heads at the Badajoz Provincial Council. The judge asked him to explain its function. His response, according to published transcripts, was simply that it handles performing arts, with no further detail. The level of explanation did not improve when asked about his daily team.

Regarding colleagues, he cited one name but could not specify their role. The scene has its own internal logic: if you never go there, you forget names. The problem is that the salary arrived punctually.

The offer only one person saw

The testimony states he found the offer via Google search. A well-paid public vacancy in an institution governed by his brother's party. And, according to available data, almost no one else applied. This coincidence is the core issue: the probability that such a position remains vacant and is found precisely by the Prime Minister's brother via a search engine is the kind of chance requiring explanation.

Some argue this is 'tailoring' the post, an old practice in administration. Counter-argument: tailoring requires knowing the post. Here, the beneficiary didn't even know where the office was.

Defense argument: lying isn't a crime

Legal analysis suggests that as a suspect, he is not obliged to tell the truth. Perjury applies to witnesses, not defendants. That is the technical shield. But the shield protects against lies, not evidence: the absence of real work cannot be fixed with a clever statement.

The strategy seems to be that of someone who didn't prepare because they never needed to. "So confident," summarized general sentiment.

Impact on fiscal narrative

The case connects to broader arguments: taxes funding hospitals, pensions, and education while parts of the public structure distribute posts without real competition. Citizens receiving tax notices have reason for irritation.

Tax residency in Portugal adds insult to injury: paying less while earning from Spanish administration. Not illegal per se. But poorly fitting.

What happens next

The matter is under investigation. No conviction or final ruling yet. What exists is testimony that reinforced suspicion rather than dispelled it. The judge faces a difficult contradiction: a vague role, a holder who can't locate it, and a hiring no one else sought.

Prediction with reservations: the case remains alive unless proof of effective work appears. If such documents exist, they haven't been shown. If not, the post was just a salary with a name.