A judge at Spain's National Court has authorized the expansion of an ongoing investigation into former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. The court will now examine a series of payments totaling 200,000 euros that Zapatero allegedly received from the Peruvian conglomerate Grupo Gloria. According to police reports, these funds were paid between 2024 and 2025 as compensation for Zapatero's efforts to influence Bolivian authorities regarding a pending compensation claim for one of the group's companies.
This new line of inquiry emerged within the broader context of the 'Plus Ultra' case, where Zapatero is already being investigated for his alleged role in a scheme involving influence peddling. Prosecutors are looking into whether he used his position to facilitate a 53-million-euro public loan for the airline Plus Ultra during the pandemic in exchange for financial benefits. The judge's latest decision confirms that the new evidence regarding the Bolivian operation is relevant to the ongoing probe.
Zapatero’s legal defense team had formally requested that the court exclude these specific payments from the case. They argued that the company involved, Focus Social Research, was not part of the original scope of the investigation. The defense contended that the police were conducting an unauthorized, broad-ranging inquiry into the former prime minister's professional life, which they claimed lacked judicial authorization and violated his rights.
However, Judge José Luis Calama rejected these arguments in a recent court order. He clarified that the discovery of these transfers was not the result of an indiscriminate search into Zapatero's private life. Instead, the judge explained that the evidence surfaced naturally during the analysis of documents already obtained through valid judicial authorization. He emphasized that the court has a duty to examine new, credible evidence of potential criminal activity when it emerges during an active investigation.
The court’s decision means that investigators will continue to scrutinize the nature of the payments to determine if they represent legitimate professional consulting fees or illicit compensation for influence peddling. The defense retains the right to appeal this decision through standard legal channels in the coming days.