Judge Peinado Responds Swiftly to Sánchez's Criticism Amid Begoña Gómez Investigation

In a remarkable display of judicial diligence, Judge Juan Carlos Peinado has responded to President of the Government Pedro Sánchez's criticisms of the judiciary in record time. The judge, overseeing the investigation into Begoña Gómez, the President's wife, has requested the release of all her emails from July 11, 2018, to the present, as reported by El Confidencial. This move comes on the heels of Sánchez's interview with The Guardian, where he voiced concerns regarding some judges engaging in political endeavors, a statement that did not sit well with Peinado. The Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard has been tasked with examining Gómez’s emails following inquiries made by Peinado about her official correspondence during August. In correspondence with the General Secretariat of the Presidency, which included a report from the Information and Communications Technology Unit of the Presidency of the Government, Judge Peinado formally requested that the General Secretariat provide this court with a copy of the specified emails. In the midst of these developments, Begoña Gómez’s defense team has sought to delay her upcoming testimony, originally scheduled for September 11. This request followed Judge Peinado's order for both Gómez and her advisor, Cristina Álvarez—who is under suspicion for embezzlement—to provide statements regarding allegations of influence peddling, corruption, misappropriation, and labor intrusiveness related to her role as a co-director of two master’s programs at the Complutense University of Madrid. Despite enduring a year-long investigation that has yielded no conclusive results for Peinado thus far, the urgency of Sánchez's recent remarks has seemingly pressed the judge to act swiftly. To accommodate scheduling conflicts presented by Gómez’s attorney, Peinado has moved her testimony up to September 10 at 12 PM. The judicial proceedings have faced scrutiny; two previous reports from the UCO noted an absence of incriminating evidence, indicating a potential limitation on Peinado’s actions that could lead to exploratory investigations. As controversy swirls around the investigation, the implications for both the judiciary and the presidency loom large, with observers noting that the ramifications of this case could extend well beyond the courtroom. Related Sources: • Source 1 • Source 2