The former head of Cabinet in the PSOE of Pedro Sánchez asks the National Audience to cancel the cloning of his mobile

Juan Manuel Serrano, former chief of staff to Pedro Sánchez within Spain's ruling Socialist Party (PSOE) and former president of Correos, has filed an appeal with the National Court’s Criminal Division seeking to annul the cloning of his mobile phone. The device was cloned in mid-August in the presence of his lawyer, according to documents obtained by elDiario.es. Serrano argues that both the procedure used by the Central Operational Unit (UCO) to seize the device in May and the subsequent extraction of its contents violated legal standards. According to the appeal, agents from the UCO demanded Serrano hand over his iPhone 15 Pro Max along with its access PIN and unlock code in late May. This occurred in public, near the corner of Ponzano and Maudes streets in Madrid. His defense claims the officers acted imperatively and without judicial authorization, despite the judge having previously denied the designation of Serrano as an "under investigation" subject due to lack of evidence. The defense adds that after Judge Pedraz authorized the copying of the phone in the presence of Serrano’s lawyer, the UCO carried out the data extraction at a police station on July 14 and 15, without Serrano being present and in a unilateral manner. The National Police later described this action as a possible error. In response, Judge Pedraz decided to conduct the cloning in court, in the presence of Serrano and his attorney, to ensure all legal requirements were met. Now, Serrano’s defense contends that the cloning process is null and void and cannot be corrected as the investigating judge has attempted. They argue that the absence of a judicial resolution authorizing the seizure of the phone is insufficient because the law mandates that such actions must be explicitly permitted by law or judicial order. Regarding the unsealing of the phone at the police station without Serrano’s presence, the defense points out that Judge Pedraz’s ruling allowing this invasive measure specifically required the affected individual to be present. Furthermore, the judge ordered a preliminary analysis before the cloning, which means the raw extraction of all data was outside the scope of the authorization. The defense emphasizes that the irregularity in obtaining the evidence cannot be validated simply by the possibility of verifying the clone or conducting a new one during the August 18 hearing. An essential flaw in how the evidence was obtained does not become valid merely because there was a later opportunity to challenge it. Additionally, the defense highlights that the phone remained in the hands of the UCO from May 27 until July 14, when the cloning took place. During this time, they argue, the device was accessed without judicial oversight or the presence of the defense, making it impossible to guarantee the integrity of the evidence. “There is no way to confirm that during that entire period there was no unauthorized access to the content of the mobile device,” they stated. They further noted that while the court scheduled a meeting for August 18, 2026, for Serrano and his lawyer to verify the existing clone or order a new one in a judicial setting, this act cannot validate the initial flawed process. On another front, regarding Judge Pedraz’s August 7 ruling stating that Serrano could bring a forensic expert of his choosing to question aspects of the cloning on August 18, the defense explains that this decision was communicated to Serrano on the day of the cloning itself. There was no time to locate and appoint an expert beforehand. “This right to control the forensic examination was offered too late,” they added.