The Spanish investigating judge Santiago Pedraz is seeking clarification about a payment of 105,122.76 euros from the law firm of lawyer Ismael Oliver to his fellow lawyer Gonzalo Martínez Fresneda. He is defending former socialist politician Gaspar Zarrías. Several Spanish media outlets reported this on 11 November, citing a judicial order.
According to the reports, the judge is following up on information from the Spanish tax authority. He has asked Oliver to specify the services that justified the payment and, if applicable, to provide supporting documents. Oliver is himself under investigation in the case. According to the news website Vozpópuli, the judge points out that, as a suspect, he is not required to provide documents that could incriminate him.
The distinction between lawyer and client is crucial: according to the reports, the recipient of the money was Martínez Fresneda, not Zarrías. According to the newspaper El Español, Martínez Fresneda is not listed as a suspect in the case. The judge’s request, in itself, does not mean that the payment was unlawful or that Zarrías benefited from it.
Cadena SER radio received an explanation for the fee from people close to Martínez Fresneda: until September, the lawyer had represented former Venezuelan deputy minister Nervis Villalobos in two cases before the National Court . Oliver’s law firm had engaged and paid him for this work. This is the account given by people close to the recipient of the payment; the report does not say whether it is supported by documents.
Pedraz is investigating the so-called Leire case at the National Court. It concerns suspicions that a network around Leire Díez tried to influence politically damaging investigations to the detriment of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party or the government. Oliver and Zarrías are listed as suspects in this connection. The presumption of innocence applies to suspects.
According to El Español, Zarrías told the court that he had paid Díez a total of 16,000 euros for four months’ work on a report. It remains unclear whether the payment between the lawyers now under investigation is connected to the alleged attempts at influence. The current order is initially concerned with the question of what services justified the fee.
Editor: Mira Cadena (Article created with AI assistance).