Interior asks the Judicial Power to take measures for the words of Peinado about the escorts of Begoña Gómez

Interior has formally requested the Judicial Power to take action against Judge Juan Carlos Peinado over his remarks regarding the bodyguards of Begoña Gómez. The move comes after the minister of the Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, expressed strong disapproval of the judge’s comments, which he described as a serious challenge to the professionalism of state security forces. In a formal complaint submitted to the President of the Council General of the Judicial Power, Isabel Perelló, Marlaska emphasized that Peinado's statements questioned the integrity of these officers, who operate strictly within the bounds of legality and constitutional principles.

Judge Peinado made these remarks in the course of issuing a ruling where he ordered the revocation of Begoña Gómez’s passport as a precautionary measure to prevent her from evading judicial proceedings. In his ruling, he stated that the agents responsible for escorting Begoña Gómez could potentially facilitate her escape either on their own initiative or following orders from their superiors. He further noted that the position of prime minister, held by Pedro Sánchez, is temporary, suggesting that this status might one day disappear, thereby making it easier for such a hypothetical escape to occur.

Marlaska condemned these remarks as unjustified and lamented that they not only targeted specific officers but also implicated their superiors, accusing them of possibly issuing illegal orders. The minister stressed that the actions of these security personnel are guided solely by legality and constitute one of the cornerstones of the rule of law.

The comments have drawn sharp criticism from police unions. Several associations have called the judge’s remarks “an outright disgrace,” “particularly worrying,” or “an intolerable, scandalous, and miserable offense.” They argue that the professionals assigned to protect government officials act exclusively within the scope of the law, ensuring the safety of those under their charge while maintaining complete neutrality and strict adherence to current legislation and judicial decisions. These unions assert that questioning their conduct lacks justification and constitutes an unwarranted discredit of exemplary public servants.

From the perspective of the government, particularly from the Moncloa headquarters, there appears to be a perception that the judge is engaging in a political pursuit. This view is supported by the fact that the investigation into Begoña Gómez has faced several setbacks from the Madrid Provincial Court over the past two years. The PSOE has issued a statement expressing concern that the reputation and life of an individual are being played with simply because she is the wife of the Prime Minister. They describe the situation as a form of persecution that has already caused irreversible damage to Begoña Gómez and undermined the image of the judiciary and democracy itself.

This controversy highlights the tension between the judicial process and political considerations, raising questions about the independence of the judiciary and the potential influence of political factors in ongoing investigations. As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how the Judicial Power will respond to the Interior Ministry’s request and whether the judge’s remarks will lead to further disciplinary measures or legal consequences. Meanwhile, the debate continues to reflect broader concerns about the role of the judiciary in cases involving high-profile individuals and the implications of such cases for public trust in democratic institutions.