The case concerns a senior official at the College of Official Physicians in Badajoz who faced multiple accusations of sexual misconduct at the workplace.
A prosecutor had sought a 9-year sentence, while a special prosecutor asked for 17 years. Through a tacit agreement among the prosecutor, defense, and the special prosecutor, the penalties were reduced. The final sentence has not yet been formally issued in writing, but it is understood that the defendant, Javier Rojo Madrid, who has served at the College for more than three decades, will face 3 years in prison and a total compensation of 36,000 euros to be paid to the three victims. Each sexual abuse incident is to be punished with one year in prison, as reflected in the agreement. Initially five staff members from the College reported the misconduct, yet only three persisted through the process. While the maximum potential penalties could reach 3 years per act, the agreement specifies the minimum terms.
The oral hearing was scheduled for the following Monday but was suspended after the implicit agreement that the Badajoz College of Official Physicians would not assume responsibility for the events. This arrangement included a determination of secondary liability by the institution, which the investigating court in Badajoz had previously rejected at the outset.
In the decision announced orally, pending formal written notification, the school’s lawyer emphasized that only the senior officer who admitted the abuse would face criminal and civil consequences. This stance implied that the institution itself bore no liability. Pedro Hidalgo, president of the College, spoke to this publication after learning of the agreement that did not include the institution, describing the outcome as evidence of a flawless performance by the College and its leadership.
Hidalgo’s own position ended up with a personal consequence: he was dismissed after more than 20 days of formal procedures, as a measure described by the High Court of Justice of Extremadura as a dismissal without compensation for serious reasons. He also asserted the College’s continued support for the victims of the misconduct, while acknowledging the pain faced by those affected.
Among the complainants, one continues to work at the College, another is on sick leave, and the third is employed by an external cleaning company serving the school building.
The prosecutor’s office initially requested a 9-year sentence for gender-based sexual abuse affecting three coworkers, applying the sentence consecutively. The special prosecutor’s office asked for a total of 17 years, adding 3 years for workplace harassment and 2 years for threats.
From the outset, the defendant maintained his innocence. In court testimony, he denied abusing his colleagues and disputed the circumstances described by the victims.
Javier Rojo Madrid, who served for over 30 years at the College of Physicians, was removed by the board after the allegations emerged in January 2022. He began as a junior officer, later rising to senior officer and head of the school office during the events. The long tenure and a close relationship with the school administration were cited by prosecutors as factors that granted him significant influence over staff.
Within the same report, the three women who reported the abuse described instances of repeated touching, groping, and inappropriate kisses, including one occasion when the defendant kissed a worker on the mouth and attempted to embrace her from behind as she was leaving to present documents. The victims recounted how they asked him to stop and to seek help, but were met with the implication that the school’s leadership would back him. Eventually, they felt unsupported and believed they would face repercussions for speaking out.
The aftermath left several employees dealing with anxiety and depressive symptoms, with some requiring psychopharmacological treatment as a result of the trauma they experienced at work.
As the legal process unfolded, the case drew attention to the interplay between individual accountability and institutional responsibility within professional bodies. The court’s handling of the matter highlighted the challenge of balancing the protection of victims with considerations of organizational liability in cases of workplace abuse. The resolution, while addressing the immediate criminal consequences for the accused, also prompted ongoing discussion about safeguarding measures and the duty of institutions to foster safe working environments for all staff members.
In the end, the parties involved pursued a resolution that prioritized accountability for the individual while attempting to limit broader institutional exposure. The implications for the College and its leadership, as well as for those who reported the misconduct, remain a focus for continued oversight and reform within the organization and its governance structures.
Note: All information reflects the events described in official court proceedings and subsequent statements reported by regional media outlets. Citations: Tribunal statements and court summaries attributed in coverage of the case.