The Supreme Court has found judge Baltasar Garzon guilty of authorising illegal recordings of lawyers’ conversations and he has been banned from the legal profession for 11 years with no appeal possible against the ruling.
Baltasar Garzon came to prominence by helping to secure the arrest of the former Chilean leader Augusto Pinochet in London.
He also faces two other charges, including exceeding his authority by investigating Franco-era crimes.
The ruling by the Supreme Court is widely seen as effectively ending Garzon’s career as a judge. His supporters say the cases brought against him are politically motivated and have been taking part in demonstrations outside the court during the trial.
However, this is not the case against Baltasar Garzon which has attracted most attention. The verdict in his second trial, which is concerned with his attempts to investigate alleged crimes carried out under the dictatorship of Francisco Franco will be more controversial. The verdict in this case is expected in a few weeks.
Many people see the judge as a champion of human rights and justice, especially the relatives of people who ‘disappeared’ under the Franco regime. Others, however, see him as a politically motivated judge who seeks controversy and the media limelight.
Whereas most international commentators are dismayed that the man who attempted to put the former Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet, on trial has now been tried himself, in Spain the issue divides opinion and evokes strong feelings on both the right and left of Spanish society.
The conviction relates to the wire-tapping of conversations between prisoners and their lawyers ordered by Mr Garzon in 2009. The detainees are accused of paying off politicians in return for government contracts.
Under Spanish law, wiretaps are only expressly permitted for matters relating to terrorism laws and the legality if its use for other cases is a bit more vague.