The president of Valencia’s 13th Investigation Court, together with a set of conditions, agreed to appear in the Azud case as the popular accusation representing the People’s Party and Vox. The magistrate confirmed that the two political formations are bound by current law to participate, even though concerns were raised by both the PP and Vox about the propriety of this move. The judge stressed that the appearance is mandatory under the legislation in force, and thus cannot be refused, though it may be subject to further scrutiny as the proceedings unfold.
Each political entity was required to post a bond of 10,000 euros as a guarantee, and both signaled their willingness to participate under a single legal mandate while defending parallel interests. In Vox’s case, there was a request for clear articulation of the reasons behind its decision to join as a popular accusation, with the magistrate noting that the reasons or motives should be stated in the submission. Vox maintained that no explicit motive needed to be disclosed in its initial document submitted to the court, arguing that the appearance is compelled by the statutory framework and does not necessitate a separate complaint for personal attendance or bail. The parties agreed to appear in person after becoming aware that the macro case involved seven separate pieces affecting the PSPV-PSOE and the alleged irregular financing of the 2007 and 2008 election campaigns, with claims of improper bribery through campaign spending financed by private companies. The case initially focused on the investigation of José María Corbín, the brother-in-law of Valencia mayor Rita Barberá, who was alleged to have received commissions from Valencia City Council contractors, and later expanded to include the former deputy mayor of Valencia, Alfonso Grau.
As the investigation widened, prosecutors and defense teams prepared for a broad judicial process, with attention turning to how financial flows and political affiliations intersect with public contracts and party financing. Observers noted that the involvement of major local actors would likely shape the trajectory of the proceedings, including potential implications for municipal governance and party integrity. The appearance of the two parties as popular accusers would amplify the political dimension of the case, underscoring the ongoing tension between accountability mechanisms and the strategic interests of national parties within regional politics. The Azud case thus stands as a focal point for examining the demands of anti-corruption measures, the responsibilities of elected officials, and the transparency standards expected from both major parties in Spain, as the courtroom navigates complex evidentiary and procedural questions raised by the accusations and the defense arguments. This development reflects continuing efforts to address alleged campaign finance irregularities and contractor relationships that have attracted public scrutiny and political debate across the Valencian community and beyond, with potential lessons for similar inquiries elsewhere in the country according to observers and legal commentators cited in public discourse.