Zapatero points again to the nullity of the origin of the 'Plus Ultra case'

The recent revelation regarding the valuation of jewelry found in the safe of former Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero has sparked significant public interest and debate. The items were discovered during a search of his office following his indictment in the Plus Ultra case. A detailed appraisal conducted by the prestigious jewelry firm Ansorena estimated the collection's total value at approximately 1.323.915 euros. This figure includes high-value pieces such as a white gold necklace with emeralds valued at 278,000 euros, another necklace featuring thirteen sapphires and diamonds worth 220,000 euros, and several bracelets made of white gold with precious stones totaling around 95,000, 80,000, and 72,000 euros respectively. Additional items include rings and earrings, some adorned with natural emeralds from Zambia, which could be worth up to 80,000 euros.

Initially, Zapatero’s team had estimated the value of these items between 30,000 and 50,000 euros, a claim later admitted to being misleading. His spokesperson, Luis Arroyo, apologized for this misrepresentation. Meanwhile, Zapatero’s secretary, Gertrudis Alcázar, stated before investigators that the contents of the safe belonged to Zapatero and his wife, Sonsoles Espinosa, and that they originated from her inheritance and gifts received during his travels.

The discovery of these valuable items has led many to question their origin and whether they might indicate something more than mere personal possession. Among those questioned was Esperanza Aguirre, former President of the Community of Madrid, former Culture Minister, and former Senate President. In an interview on the program 'Espejo Público,' she discussed how she handled gifts received during her political career. She mentioned receiving numerous presents, especially when serving as an environmental council member and as a senator. Some notable examples included a traditional Valencian costume worth two million pesetas, which she sent to the Senate inventory, and an impressive horse saddle she encountered during an official trip to Algeria, which she also sent to the Senate inventory after finding it at the airport. Similarly, she sent gray pearls received from jewelers after giving a speech in Córdoba to the Senate inventory.

Aguirre explained that she often rejected gifts received during official trips, leading to the perception that she only accepted flowers and other consumable items. She clarified that she kept anything that was fungible, including flowers and many books that might have some value. She emphasized that she did not keep any non-fungible items, unlike some others who might have retained more valuable gifts.

In addition to the jewelry controversy, there is ongoing legal scrutiny surrounding the Plus Ultra case involving Zapatero. The judge handling the case, José Luis Calama, has paused the analysis of the legality of a crucial piece of evidence until he receives a response from the United States. This evidence involves the cloning of the mobile phone of Rodolfo Reyes, a former major shareholder of Plus Ultra, carried out by the U.S. agency Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) in 2021. The information was provided to Spanish authorities five years later, on March 18, 2026. Zapatero's lawyer, Víctor Moreno Catena, has requested clarification from the judge about the circumstances under which the phone was cloned, whether it was done within the framework of an open investigation in the U.S., and whether the chain of custody was respected.

Calama has postponed further examination of this issue pending a response from the U.S. government regarding its potential use in the Spanish legal process. He emphasized that while information from foreign police authorities can serve as a research tool, its effectiveness as evidence in a criminal trial requires proper incorporation into court proceedings. He referenced bilateral treaties, requests for judicial assistance, and institutionalized police channels as possible avenues for achieving this.

Zapatero himself has raised concerns about the validity of the evidence used against him in the Plus Ultra case, suggesting that the case might be nullified due to the lack of traceability of the mobile phone intercepted from Reyes. His attorney argues that it is essential for the National Court to clarify the legality and usability of the device, which was apparently handed over to the Central Investigation Brigade Against Money Laundering and Corruption of the Spanish National Police by the U.S. government agency Homeland Security Investigations. According to the lawyer, although the American authorities authorized the use of the device by the Spanish police, this authorization did not extend to incorporating it into judicial proceedings. He warned the judge that judicial bodies are constitutionally obligated to ensure the legality of all information incorporated into the case.

As the legal battle continues, the focus remains on both the valuation of Zapatero's jewelry and the legitimacy of the evidence used against him. These developments highlight the complex interplay between personal assets, legal procedures, and international cooperation in addressing allegations of corruption and financial misconduct.