MADRID, Spain — Nearly two months after his indictment in the “Plus Ultra” case, the Spanish government is growing increasingly uneasy over former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero’s prolonged silence. While the administration maintains its political trust in his innocence, it has notably softened its once-unwavering public defense due to his failure to address key questions, including the origin of a €1.3 million jewelry collection found in his office.
Spain Probes Ex-PM Zapatero and Family in ‘Plus Ultra’ Tax Investigation
The executive branch, led by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, is subtly distancing itself from the former socialist leader. Officials close to the Prime Minister have begun repeating a new mantra to the press: “We are not his spokespeople.” This marks a significant shift from the seamless political shielding Moncloa provided immediately after the judicial order became public. The government is now carefully delineating its continued belief in Zapatero’s innocence from any obligation to justify his specific actions or his ongoing silence, insisting that the rescue of the airline Plus Ultra was entirely legal and devoid of any preferential treatment.
The administration admits it has no timeline for when Zapatero will provide the pending explanations regarding the case’s main mysteries. Crucially, the former president has yet to request a voluntary appearance before the investigating judge, despite announcing his intention to do so twenty days ago. This delay is particularly notable regarding a cache of jewels valued at €1.3 million, which were discovered in his office by the financial crimes unit. During his initial testimony on June 17, Zapatero defended the legality of payments from his business partner, Julio Martínez Martínez, and the hiring of his daughters’ company, Whathefav SL. He denied taking bribes or mediating for the airline, but he refused to answer questions about the jewelry, citing a lack of time to gather supporting documents.
Investigating Judge José Luis Calama rejected Zapatero’s initial arguments in a ruling issued the same day, stating that the former leader failed to dispel the evidence placing him at the “vertex” of an alleged influence-peddling network. Despite promising to clarify the origin of the jewels within a week or ten days, his defense attorney, Víctor Moreno, has not yet formally requested the voluntary hearing to address the matter.
#ABCrecomienda ✍️ El silencio de Zapatero inquieta a Moncloahttps://t.co/enV1O0QZ3Z
— ABC.es (@abc_es) July 3, 2026
The evolving dynamic has been further complicated by the State Attorney’s decision to join the proceedings as an injured party in the specific branch of the investigation concerning the alleged tax fraud related to the jewelry. While Moncloa insists this is a standard procedural step mandated by law and does not contradict their political support for Zapatero, it creates a stark paradox. The government is forced to maintain two parallel narratives: publicly defending the former president’s innocence while the State apparatus actively participates in the judicial process against him as a potentially harmed entity.
This measured approach toward Zapatero stands in sharp contrast to the administration’s aggressive posture regarding legal matters involving the Prime Minister’s wife, Begoña Gómez. In recent press conferences following the Council of Ministers, cabinet members have frequently and openly criticized judicial rulings affecting her, labeling some decisions as unnecessary and questioning the judges’ criteria. With Zapatero, however, the government is increasingly reluctant to act as his public defender or supply arguments to fill the void of his silence.
The shift in defense strategy has been gradual. Initially, the administration denounced a potential lawfare operation, later pivoting to argue a lack of conclusive proof and the difficulty in distinguishing between lobbying and influence peddling. They subsequently utilized the former president’s public agenda to reinforce their defense. However, nearly two months later, the focus has shifted away from contesting the investigation’s content to justifying a prolonged silence that is becoming increasingly uncomfortable for the executive.
Spanish Police Report Attributes €4 Million In Payments To Former Prime Minister Zapatero
Government sources maintain that their trust in Zapatero is not based on privileged information about the investigation, but rather on patience with a judicial process that they argue is advancing faster politically than legally. They insist there are no new facts warranting a withdrawal of their support and appeal to respect judicial timelines. Nevertheless, as the weeks pass without public clarification from the former president, this patience remains the administration’s primary argument, even as the uncertainty surrounding his eventual testimony continues to cast a growing shadow over the ruling party.
