A courtroom paused, a story redirected: How a Spanish probe into Julio Iglesias stalled on jurisdiction
In a building of granite and quiet power in Madrid, judges folded a case back into their files and, in doing so, forced a complicated story to shift its geography. What began as a complaint lodged amid newspaper exposés and television investigations has been stilled for now — not because the questions disappeared, but because the map of justice is uneven and the alleged events, according to Spain’s High Court prosecutors, occurred beyond Spain’s reach.
On a crisp winter morning, prosecutors at Spain’s High Court said they would not proceed with a preliminary inquiry into singer Julio Iglesias. The reason given was straightforward in law and stubborn in consequence: the alleged crimes were said to have taken place in the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas, and the women claiming harm were not Spanish residents — meaning Madrid’s courts lacked the jurisdiction to try the case.
What sparked the complaint
The complaint was filed on January 5 by Women’s Link Worldwide, a rights organisation that frequently brings strategic litigation on behalf of survivors. It represented two women described as having worked in properties owned by Iglesias in the Caribbean for roughly ten months in 2021. The filing cited reporting by U.S. broadcaster Univision and Spanish outlet elDiario.es that detailed allegations ranging from forced labour and servitude to sexual assault and violations of workers’ rights.
“We brought this case because survivors asked for their voices to be heard,” said a lawyer for Women’s Link Worldwide. “When institutions in the country where the alleged harm occurred are not moving, you look for alternatives. That is how transnational justice should function — but it requires legal pathways that sometimes aren’t available.”
Allegations on record
The accusations, as described in the complaint and subsequent media reports, included:
- Human trafficking for forced labour and servitude
- Sexual assault
- Systematic violations of employment and labour rights
Julio Iglesias, the 82-year-old global music star once celebrated on stadium stages and in glossy profiles, publicly dismissed the allegations on social media as “completely false.” Attempts to reach his representatives for further comment were not successful, and his record label declined to engage on the matter.
Why the High Court stopped the inquiry
In a terse but consequential filing, the prosecutor’s office said that because the alleged acts occurred in the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas, Spain’s High Court lacked the competence to investigate. The filing also underlined a second legal hurdle: the alleged victims were not Spanish citizens nor residents — a factor that, together with existing Supreme Court jurisprudence, limits Spain’s application of universal jurisdiction in such circumstances.
“This is not a question of whether allegations are true or false. It is a question of where a court has the mandate to adjudicate,” a senior prosecutor told me. “Our legal system sets boundaries. Those boundaries can sometimes frustrate victims seeking remedies when transnational crimes are involved.”
Context: universal jurisdiction and Spanish law
Universal jurisdiction is a legal principle that allows a nation to prosecute certain serious crimes — such as genocide, war crimes or torture — even if they were committed elsewhere and neither the perpetrators nor victims are nationals. Spain’s courts once applied this principle expansively; the 1998 attempt by Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón to issue an international arrest warrant for Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet became a landmark moment, showcasing Spain’s reach in international human rights cases.
But in recent years, Spain has narrowed the scope of universal jurisdiction. Supreme Court rulings and legislative tweaks have increasingly required stronger links to Spain — such as Spanish victims or suspects within Spanish territory — for cases to proceed. That jurisprudential tightening is exactly what the High Court cited in declining the Iglesias inquiry.
Voices from the street and the court
On a Madrid sidewalk outside the National Court, opinions were a mosaic of curiosity, scepticism and weary recognition.
“It’s frustrating,” said Ana, a 34-year-old social worker who asked to be identified only by her first name. “When powerful people are implicated, you expect cross-border mechanisms to work. But international law is complicated. The survivors deserve an effective forum.”
A music industry veteran familiar with Iglesias’s career, who spoke on condition of anonymity, reflected on how reputation and the legal system can diverge. “He is an icon for many — sold millions of records, filled arenas — and that fame can create a pressure to close ranks. But that documentary journalism matters. It brings stories that would otherwise drift away.”
What this means for survivors and for justice
For the women named in the complaint, the High Court’s decision does not erase the allegations or remove the possibility of accountability in the future. The prosecutor’s office explicitly noted that prosecution could still be pursued in the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas. But the path ahead is difficult. Countries with smaller legal systems often lack resources, may struggle with political pressures, or face obstacles in investigating foreign-linked cases.
“When jurisdictional gaps appear, victims often fall through them,” said a university professor of international law. “This is a global issue — crimes increasingly cross borders, but legal remedies remain mostly tied to them.”
Globally, human trafficking and forced labour remain pressing concerns. According to the International Labour Organization, an estimated 24.9 million people were in forced labour worldwide in a 2016 assessment, and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reports that only a fraction of traffickers are ever convicted. Those numbers speak to the institutional challenge: identification of victims is often the start, not the end, of a long hunt for justice.
Media, memory, and the court of public opinion
This episode also illuminates how modern investigations unfold. The complaint relied heavily on investigative journalism — long-form reporting that can take months of interviews, fact-checking and careful documentation. In an age when news cycles spin fast, slow investigative work continues to play a crucial role in unearthing stories that might otherwise remain private.
“Journalism and law are partners here,” said the Women’s Link lawyer. “Journalists uncover facts, survivors speak out, and lawyers try to translate narratives into enforceable claims. Where one link breaks down, the whole chain can fail.”
Where do we go from here?
For now, the story travels. It must land in the Caribbean courts if channels for justice are to open. It will likely be followed by renewed calls from rights groups for stronger international cooperation, better victim protection, and more robust avenues for survivors to seek redress.
And for the public, it surfaces uncomfortable questions: How do we hold the powerful to account when alleged wrongs span oceans? Whose courts answer for harm that crosses borders? What responsibilities do journalists and advocates carry in bringing these matters into view?
These are not academic queries. They are questions about power, place, and the promise of law. They ask us whether justice should stop at territorial lines or find ways to follow the people most affected.
In the end, the High Court’s decision is procedural, but its reverberations are human. Two women, a music star whose songs have roused millions, and a legal framework that must reconcile the local with the global — all exist in the same story. If this chapter has closed in Madrid, the book is far from finished. Who will read the next pages? Who will write them? And most importantly, will the search for truth continue where it must?
















