The decision by the Spanish Supreme Court to initiate criminal proceedings against Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz for the possible offence of breach of confidentiality has caused political and institutional upheaval. But what is truly remarkable is not the proceedings themselves, but the reaction of Pedro Sánchez’s government, which is openly mocking and disparaging the court – an attitude that stands in stark contrast to his own previous principles.
Redaction Spanien Press
Even within the PSOE and among its core voters, this behaviour is causing astonishment. Many remember well how Sánchez defended strict respect for the separation of powers for years – before now changing his position once again.
A highly political case
The Supreme Court accuses García Ortiz of publishing sensitive information about the partner of Isabel Díaz Ayuso, the president of the Madrid region. Ayuso is considered one of Sánchez’s fiercest and most consistent political opponents.
The fact that people from her circle are affected gives the case additional political significance.
Never before has a sitting Attorney General in Spain been brought before the Supreme Court – a historic event.
The government responds with ridicule instead of respect
Instead of adopting a factual, institutionally restrained tone, the government opted for unusually aggressive rhetoric:
-
Pedro Sánchez declared that the prosecutor had ‘only defended the truth’.
-
Transport Minister Óscar Puente compared the court’s decision to a story from ‘Jack the Ripper’.
-
Justice Minister Félix Bolaños said that individual passages seemed like a ‘Hollywood script’.
These statements are directed against the country’s highest criminal court – and leave many in their own political camp perplexed. Not long ago, the ruling party insisted that the judiciary was unassailable. Now it becomes the target of ironic comments as soon as a ruling becomes politically inconvenient.
The turnaround: Sánchez makes another ‘change of position’
The current conflict once again highlights what many observers have long recognised as a political pattern:
Sánchez changes his positions depending on the situation, often in direct contradiction to his previous statements.
For years, he had declared:
-
that the separation of powers was sacrosanct,
-
that political influence on the judiciary was taboo,
-
and that members of the government must always respect court rulings.
Today, however, he mocks the Supreme Court – the very institution he once described as the foundation of democracy.
Another ‘change of position’ that erodes his credibility.
Previous examples: Catalonia and Bildu as turning points
Catalonia crisis
Sánchez promised long and with great determination that:
-
there would be no pardons for the convicted leaders of the procés,
-
no amnesty was conceivable,
-
and such measures were ‘constitutionally impossible’.
Shortly afterwards, the opposite happened:
he pardoned the politicians, negotiated with Junts and ERC, and supported an amnesty that he himself had previously strictly rejected.
An exemplary ‘change of position’.
Bildu
The situation was similar with the Basque party EH Bildu.
For years, Sánchez insisted that he would never be dependent on their votes. Today, their MPs are among the most important parliamentary supporters of his government.
Here, too, there has been a clear ‘change of position’ that has not escaped the attention of voters.
Unrest within the PSOE
Many socialists are now openly expressing their irritation.
They fear that the government’s open mockery of the Supreme Court will:
-
damage Spain’s institutional credibility,
-
provide the opposition with unnecessary ammunition,
-
and convey the impression that the judiciary is only ‘respected’ when it rules in favour of the head of government.
One party member puts it this way:
‘What used to be sacrosanct is now being ridiculed – yet another “change of position”.’
Next stop: the Spanish Constitutional Court
The case will most likely end up before the Constitutional Court.
Many analysts see the government’s sharp comments as an attempt to shape the political environment in advance – an approach that further exacerbates institutional tensions.
Conclusion: a pattern that can no longer be overlooked
The proceedings against the Attorney General are undoubtedly extraordinary.
But the greater political damage is caused by the government’s reaction: the mockery of the Supreme Court, the renewed departure from previous principles and the next ‘change of position’, which fits seamlessly into a long series of course corrections.
First Catalonia.
Then Bildu.
Now the country’s highest court.
The question that many people ask themselves is:
How many ‘changes of position’ can a head of government make before his credibility is finally eroded?
