The sentence that condemns the president's brother leaves an inevitable trace: Pedro Sánchez's name appears mentioned up to six times in the 378 pages of the Badajoz Provincial Court ruling, although the judges do not attribute any criminal responsibility to him in the criminal facts tried.

An uncomfortable presence in the ruling

According to abc.es, the Court constantly recalls Sánchez's political position in the PSOE at two crucial moments: when his brother David was hired at the Badajoz Provincial Council, under the presidency of Miguel Ángel Gallardo, and later when he arrived at La Moncloa in June 2018.

The most pointed mention appears in the analysis of how the position of coordinator of activities for conservatories in Badajoz was created. The judges stress that the post was specifically tailored for David Sánchez, with no accredited functions as necessary or urgent that would justify its creation. The Court notes that all this occurred while the current president "held the highest responsibility in the PSOE executive and would be invested president of the Government of Spain in June 2018".

Convicted but without proof of direct influence

Despite this context, the judges acknowledge that there is no direct evidence that Pedro Sánchez was aware of the facts or that he exerted pressure on those responsible for the hiring. The sentence condemns David Sánchez to nine years of disqualification for misconduct and Miguel Ángel Gallardo to eighteen years for the same crime.

The judges explain their reasoning clearly: after examining all evidence—statements from investigated parties and witnesses, Civil Guard reports and seized communications—they cannot identify a "direct thread" between the musician's hiring and his brother's influence. Nor do they find evidence that the president was aware of the manoeuvres to favour the award.

The "blatant" exercise of power

What is established for the judges is that both David Sánchez and Miguel Ángel Gallardo committed a "blatant arbitrary exercise of power" with the sole purpose of benefiting specific individuals. In David Sánchez's case, the job content was even modified to adapt it to his operatic interests.

This conclusion underscores an uncomfortable reality: although the president does not appear as the author of the crimes, his brother took advantage of the family's political position to obtain a public job that should never have existed. The facts reveal a pattern of institutional favouritism linked to family ties.

What happens now

The sentence, handed down by the Badajoz Provincial Court, is subject to appeal before the High Court of Justice of Extremadura. So far it has not emerged whether the condemned parties will file an appeal or accept the ruling.

What remains clear is that, although Justice does not pursue the president over these facts, his figure will be permanently associated with a case of administrative corruption within his own party and for the benefit of his brother. A shadow that, apparently, the judges could not avoid mentioning when narrating what occurred.