The DAO case: abuse of power, deprotection and political cronyism

The complaint regarding González was allegedly sent to a subordinate official who lived with a camouflaged vehicle, and there he absorbed the act of sexual assault with penetration to consider the victim’s negative statements.

There are allegations of systematic pressure campaigns to prevent reporting and proposals to compensate me for my work while I pay for my silence.

This report, detailed and explicitly described in a court document, was quickly picked up by the media and placed the complainant at the center of a vicious media exhibition. The overexposure of so many intimate and traumatic details not only affects the dignity of the person reported, but rather is retraumatized in the context of a complete loss of institutional power.

This level of disclosure (even technically public for the purposes of legal proceedings) raises deep doubts about the ethical limits of periodical coverage.

But more than the human dimension of the case, what makes this episode particularly significant is the institutional and political context in which it occurred.

González was not a mando más. From 2018, he will manage the Additional Operational Directorate, operational number of the authority, single number, since the appointment of the current Minister of the Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaskaon the hand of the letter.

In November 2024, the Home Secretary amended the body’s personal law to allow the chief commissioner to demonstrate the load without restriction until 2020, leaving the enjoyment of six and five years untouched.

This amendment was called out by opposition parties and political sectors for its obvious nature ad hoc to extend the mandate of a particular man.

There have been other episodes that challenge the leadership of the Ministry of the Interior in terms of numbers and perceptions of institutional governance.

In December 2025, Marlaska defended the case of the political jefe in Lleida by acknowledging the conviction for sexual offenses that were against the mark of the last decade, although his statements caused controversy by attributing responsibility for the crime to “another body within the ministry” and highlighting it in the most legal criteria that are ethical.

It takes years for the National Police low accusations of internal politicizationwhile trade unions such as Jupol condemned personnel decisions, the department of honors and operational crisis management as symptoms of “clientelistic” or arbitrary use of the institution by part of the Ministry of the Interior.

It is Jupol who in recent months has led the harshest criticism not only against operative management, but also against the perception that the political body is in line with political and unprofessional criteria.

In the case of the DAO, Jupol was quick to demand immediate delivery and asked the Minister of the Interior to take responsibility for its record keeping and cargo maintenance, emphasizing the “enormous institutional transcendence” that this cargo hides in the credibility of the body.

The seriousness of the legal charges now facing the former DAO (with details including abuse of judicial position, psychological pressure and violent campaign) cannot be compared with other recent cases of politicians accused of sexual affairs, such as organizational secretaries or those who were allegedly the cause of social alarm due to macho behavior.

When a person with so much responsibility is investigated for persons of this nature, an institution within the police is questioned. It is not just a question of false individual ethics: it is a question of the message that is transmitted to society and, in a particularly painful way, to women within the forces of order, who should feel protected by the structure in which they find themselves.

The fact that a victim chooses to come forward, apparently overwhelmed by internal mechanisms, is symptomatic of a deep disillusionment with the reporting channels and the system that must guarantee integrity and justice.

The challenge for the government and the Ministry of the Interior is huge. It is not enough to enforce the force of the warrant and to repeat the invocation of the presumption of innocence. There are, al mens, three unacceptable requirements:

1. First, transparency. The Ministry of the Interior must be clearly explained here and when you know them and when action is taken, the surveillance mechanisms used and any prior information that will operate in its jurisdiction over the unlawful conduct.

2. The second, effective protection of the complainant. Not only in the face of possible internal reprisals, but also in the face of digital and media exposure. The ability to seek justice (if that is what one has through absolute defiance in the ordinary way) cannot be converted into a presumed social punishment.

3. Third, real despolitización. The police is not a legacy of any government, it is an institution of the state. And when political considerations outweigh professional standards, the damage goes beyond the people involved.

Spain needs a strong, professional and depoliticized national police. It cannot be a political shoe store or a space where impunity, tolerance for abnormal behavior or professional clientelism hides.

This requires continuity without dependence on affinities or behavioral balance, but on objective and evaluable criteria. We need internal reporting channels that build real trust, without fear of retaliation or a sense of futility.

Delivery time in an armed body is not a negligible assumption. Authority is supported by professional legitimacy, example and trust.

If perception is installed that certain wrongdoing was known or commented on and no consequences were drawnerosion will be devastating.