The Director of Operations (DAO) of the Spanish Guardia Civil, Manuel Llamas, appeared before the National Court on Thursday to address allegations of interference in high-profile judicial investigations. During his testimony, Llamas denied claims that he pressured the Central Operative Unit (UCO) to remain passive or "stay on the sidelines" regarding the investigation into David Sánchez, the brother of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. The court is currently investigating a broader case involving alleged efforts to undermine legal proceedings that affect the government or the Socialist Party.
The investigation into Llamas stems from reports and testimony provided by the former head of the UCO, Rafael Yuste, who alleged that the DAO and other senior officials sought to limit the unit's proactive involvement in politically sensitive cases. Llamas, however, defended his actions, characterizing the internal investigations opened against UCO agents as standard institutional procedures rather than tools for intimidation. He maintained that his interactions with the unit were focused on ensuring that investigations followed proper judicial channels.
Llamas also addressed the specific controversy surrounding the leak of a private email address belonging to Begoña Gómez, the Prime Minister's wife. He explained that he initiated an internal inquiry into the leak after receiving an inquiry from the Director General of the Guardia Civil, Mercedes González, who is also under investigation in this case. Llamas stated that his primary concern was the unauthorized dissemination of personal data, which he argued necessitated an internal review.
This testimony occurs against a backdrop of heightened political tension in Spain. Earlier this week, David Sánchez was convicted of administrative misconduct and banned from public office for nine years, a ruling that has intensified scrutiny of the government's inner circle. As the judicial process continues, the court must now weigh the conflicting accounts provided by the Guardia Civil's leadership and the former heads of its investigative units to determine whether institutional authority was misused to influence legal outcomes.