Spain’s National Court has officially rejected a bid from the Partido Popular to formally investigate the ruling Socialist party as a legal entity in connection with an ongoing judicial corruption probe. Investigative magistrate Santiago Pedraz issued a resolution siding directly with the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, ruling that any such move remains premature while vital investigative steps are still pending.
The legal maneuver by the opposition party arrived on the heels of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez calling a general election for November 29. Alberto Núñez-Feijóo’s political camp argued that the corporate entity of the PSOE should be charged immediately across five distinct criminal categories: bribery, influence peddling, money laundering, illegal financing, and embezzlement. Prosecutors and the judge determined that current evidentiary thresholds have not yet been met to justify the move against the governing political organization. But after that Pedraz asked for the opinion of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, the indictment of the socialists, which would be the first in the party’s history, does not appear to be going to happen before the polls.
At the center of the Audiencia Nacional proceedings is an alleged scheme designed to derail various court cases launched between 2024 and 2025 targeting high-profile political figures and presidential relatives. Investigators have focused heavily on former party organization secretary Santos Cerdán and former party member Leire Díez, examining whether corporate funds and organizational machinery were used to undermine ongoing legal and police actions. Between the pages of the investigation are contacts between Leire Díez and businessman Javier Pérez-Dolset in search of compromising information on prosecutors, judges, and civil guards to supposedly try to “erode” their “credibility”. In addition, the investigation also seeks to clarify whether the leadership of the Civil Guard itself sought to create a climate of intimidation among the officials of the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the armed institution who were in charge of many of these cases.
Court Scrutiny Over Internal Party Controls
Magistrate Pedraz emphasized in his ruling that establishing corporate criminal liability requires more than demonstrating that individual employees or executives broke the law. Under established Supreme Court doctrine, investigators must prove a structural failure in organizational oversight and supervision, alongside clear evidence that the entity itself secured a direct or indirect benefit from the alleged offenses.
The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office previously noted that while Santos Cerdán held broad decision-making authority within the party structure, critical evidentiary gaps remain. Prosecutors pointed to statements from party manager Ana Fuentes, party president Cristina Narbona, and other administrative personnel, suggesting an absence of rigorous internal oversight regarding financial disbursements managed through headquarters in Ferraz.
Despite these preliminary indications, authorities maintain that investigators must complete a comprehensive audit of party accounts. This step is necessary to ascertain whether funds deployed for tasks executed by Díez and associated legal figures served an institutional purpose or remained strictly personal endeavors.
Clarifying Decision-Making Hierarchy Within the Grouping
The inquiry continues to focus on clarifying the precise decision-making hierarchy within the political grouping, determining who authorized and executed specific financial transfers, and reviewing existing accounting records. Judicial authorities have stressed that key investigative milestones must proceed before any consideration of formalizing charges against the party as a corporate body.
Among the crucial upcoming steps is the formal judicial declaration of Santos Cerdán as an investigative subject, allowing him to address the allegations directly in court. Investigators intend to analyze evidence gathered from recent searches and documentation requests to map out financial flows accurately before advancing further phases of the ongoing probe. This Thursday, prosecutors Elisa Lamelas and Mar Scharfhausen considered the party’s citation as an investigated subject to be premature and defended that, although indications exist, pending diligences must be practiced before its indictment is agreed.
