Sofía Puente charged over handling of Spain's Grandchildren Law applications

Sofía Puente charged over handling of Spain's Grandchildren Law applications

The presiding judge of Madrid's Court of First Instance Number 35, María Inmaculada Lova, has admitted for processing the lawsuit filed by Hazte Oír against Sofía Puente over her handling of the Grandchildren Law. The judge charges the Transport Minister's sister with an alleged offence of administrative misconduct, although she has not yet been called to testify as a suspect. The Public Prosecutor's Office had advised against admitting the lawsuit, backing Puente's own position that the case should be dismissed as already adjudicated.

The ruling states that the facts "present characteristics that suggest the possible existence of administrative misconduct offence(s)". The lawsuit focuses on the instruction Puente issued while serving at the Ministry of Justice under Félix Bolaños, which, in the plaintiff's view, extended the application of the Democratic Memory Law beyond what Congress had approved. The legislation limited Spanish nationality to descendants of those exiled under Franco; the instruction extended it to anyone who had left Spain between 1936 and 1955.

What Sofía Puente's charges miccionan

Admitting the case is not a conviction and does not amount to formal indictment. Judge Lova considers that the lawsuit meets the requirements to be admitted and requires Hazte Oír to post a bond of 1,000 euros. The preliminary proceedings will be agreed with the plaintiff association, after the Public Prosecutor's Office spoke out against it. Puente's defence argued that two earlier lawsuits, handled by Madrid courts 21 and 25, had already been dismissed, but the judge requested the documentation of both proceedings and concluded that they do not exactly match the Grandchildren Law instruction or Hazte Oír's arguments.

The case comes at a delicate moment for the Government. The Constitutional Court is debating whether to lift the precautionary suspension of voting rights for those granted citizenship under the Grandchildren Law, which was ordered by the Supreme Court. The Central Electoral Board cannot distinguish which cases fell under the law passed by Congress and which received nationality through Puente's instruction. The Supreme Court has suspended the overseas vote of anyone who cannot individually demonstrate that their case falls within the legislator's intent.

The instruction that broadened the law: 1936 to 1955

The core of the conflict lies in a margin of almost two decades. The legislature approved that descendants of those exiled under Franco could benefit from the provision of the Democratic Memory Law. According to the lawsuit, Sofía Puente's instruction extended that right to anyone who, for whatever reason, left Spain between 1936 and 1955. That extension is what, in the plaintiff's view, constitutes administrative misconduct: issuing an arbitrary ruling while knowing it to be unjust.

The practical consequence, according to the plaintiff, is an expansion of the electoral roll. The Supreme Court cannot distinguish between those naturalised through the legislative route and those who did so through the administrative route, so it has suspended the vote of all who cannot prove they fall under the law. The Constitutional Court has the final say, but its decision comes with Puente's case already in the courts.

Who is Sofía Puente and why her surname matters

Sofía Puente is a public prosecutor by profession and the sister of Transport Minister Óscar Puente. She held a senior position at the Ministry of Justice led by Félix Bolaños when the instruction was issued. Her status as the sister of a minister in Sánchez's Government has turned the case into a political as well as judicial matter. Hazte Oír's lawsuit accuses her of administrative misconduct, an offence that punishes any authority or public official who, knowing it to be unjust, issues an arbitrary ruling in an administrative matter.

The charges do not miccionan she will be convicted. In fact, misconduct charges are often difficult to sustain in court, because they require proving that the ruling was issued with full knowledge of its illegality. The judge, however, sees sufficient grounds to investigate. The ruling does not yet call her to testify, but places her as a suspect for procedural purposes.

The standoff between the Public Prosecutor's Office, the judge and the Government

The Public Prosecutor's Office sided with Puente's argument: case already adjudicated, dismissal. Judge Lova saw it differently and admitted the lawsuit. Such a rift between the Public Prosecutor's Office and the judiciary is unusual, especially in a case that directly touches someone close to Minister Bolaños. The judge requested the files from courts 21 and 25 to check whether res judicata applied and concluded that the facts were not identical.

The result is an open investigation into an administrative instruction affecting granted nationalities. The question hanging over the file is whether Puente's instruction was a reasonable interpretation of the law or a deliberate overreach. The judge believes there are grounds to investigate. The Public Prosecutor's Office thought otherwise. The Constitutional Court, meanwhile, is deciding whether those same naturalised citizens can vote.

With the 1,000-euro bond already set and the preliminary proceedings yet to be agreed, the case enters an investigative phase that could last months. No one has yet proven that Puente committed misconduct. But the charges are already on record and the surname is in the headlines.