Zapatero, who led Spain from 2004 to 2011, began the first of two days of hearings at the Audiencia Nacional court over allegations of influence peddling linked to the 2021 state bailout of airline Plus Ultra.

The investigation centers on a 53 million euro ($61.5 million) rescue package granted to the carrier after the COVID-19 pandemic severely disrupted global air travel. Investigating magistrate Jose Luis Calama alleges that Zapatero headed a “stable and hierarchical” network that used opaque financial channels to conceal money flows and secure illicit payments connected to the bailout process.

Zapatero has categorically denied any wrongdoing. Prime Minister Sanchez has publicly expressed his “full support” for the former leader, widely regarded as his political mentor within Spain’s Socialist movement.

The case broadened after police searches of Zapatero’s office reportedly uncovered jewelry and luxury watches valued at approximately 1.3 million euros. The findings prompted investigators to examine potential tax fraud and smuggling offenses in addition to the original influence-peddling allegations.

Individuals close to Zapatero have said the valuables originated from a family inheritance and reject any suggestion of criminal conduct.

The proceedings come at a particularly sensitive moment for Sanchez, whose administration is already confronting multiple corruption investigations involving members of his inner political circle and family.

A separate inquiry into his wife, Begona Gomez, over alleged influence peddling has weighed heavily on the government for two years, with a judicial decision on whether to proceed to trial expected in the coming days.

Legal proceedings are also underway involving former Transport Minister and longtime Sanchez ally Jose Luis Abalos, while another case concerns the prime minister’s brother, David Sanchez.

Additional pressure emerged following reports of a police investigation into a former Socialist activist suspected of orchestrating efforts to obstruct corruption inquiries involving figures linked to the governing party.

The accumulation of legal controversies has weakened the Socialists politically. Since late 2025, the party has suffered four regional election defeats, fueling speculation about the impact the scandals could have on Spain’s next national election.

Sanchez rose to power in 2018 after pledging to restore integrity to Spanish politics following a major corruption scandal that resulted in the conviction of the conservative Popular Party (PP). Opposition parties now argue that the government faces its own credibility crisis and have called for Sanchez’s resignation and an early general election.

The prime minister has rejected those demands and insists he will remain in office until the end of his term in 2027. He has continued to highlight his government’s economic and social policy achievements while avoiding detailed public comment on the ongoing investigations.

Political scientist Astrid Barrio of the University of Valencia said the case carries significance beyond its legal implications because of Zapatero’s symbolic influence within the ruling Socialist Party.

“What is at stake is the reputation of someone who has become the moral beacon of Pedro Sanchez and the current Socialist Party,” Barrio said.

She added that two developments could pose the greatest threat to Sanchez’s political survival: the possibility of the prime minister himself becoming the subject of a formal investigation or prosecutors pursuing allegations of illegal party financing against the Socialists.

Prosecutors accused Estrada of receiving illicit kickbacks worth 573 million pesos ($9.3 million) from projects tied to flawed flood-control facilities. Plunder is a non-bailable offense under Philippine law.

Estrada, the son of former Philippine president Joseph Estrada, denied wrongdoing and said the case was politically motivated. He told reporters he would not seek Senate protection and was prepared to face the charges in court.

The scandal has fueled public anger over corruption and raised concerns about governance, while also affecting confidence in public infrastructure spending.

In a joint statement, Ukraine’s anti-graft agencies said a former senior official was suspected of participating in a criminal group that allegedly laundered around $10.5 million through a luxury residential development near Kyiv.

The agencies did not publicly identify the suspect, in accordance with Ukrainian legal procedure, but local media widely identified the individual as Yermak, once regarded as one of the most influential figures in the presidential administration.

Speaking to Radio Liberty, Yermak denied owning property in the housing complex linked to the investigation, but declined to comment further on the allegations.

The probe forms part of a broader anti-corruption investigation launched last year that has implicated several high-profile political and business figures tied to the Ukrainian government.

In November, prosecutors accused a former business associate of Zelensky of orchestrating a $100 million kickback scheme connected to the state atomic energy sector. A former deputy prime minister with close ties to the president was also charged in the same investigation.

Zelensky’s communications adviser, Dmytro Lytvyn, told reporters it was premature to comment on the case against Yermak because procedural steps were still underway.

Yermak, a former film producer and entertainment lawyer, emerged as a central power broker after Zelensky took office. He frequently accompanied the president at official events and played a leading role in negotiations linked to U.S.-backed peace initiatives involving Russia.

His resignation last year came during a broader reshuffle within the Ukrainian government aimed at restoring public confidence amid growing criticism over concentrated authority within the president’s office.

The latest allegations come as Ukraine continues to rely heavily on Western military and financial support, with Kyiv under sustained pressure from allies to demonstrate progress in combating entrenched corruption and strengthening institutional transparency during wartime.

Kim, the wife of jailed former president Yoon Suk Yeol, had initially been sentenced in January to 20 months in prison for bribery but was cleared of allegations that she helped manipulate stock prices and of several other charges.Both Kim and prosecutors appealed the ruling, with Kim seeking to clear her name and prosecutors arguing that the sentence was too lenient and that the acquittals were unjustified.

The Seoul High Court ruled on Tuesday that Kim had participated in manipulating the share price of Deutsch Motors, a South Korean car dealer, describing the activity as a “collusive trading act constituting market manipulation.”“The defendant appears to have participated in such conduct,” the court said in its televised judgment.

The court sentenced Kim to four years in prison and imposed a fine of 50 million won ($34,000), significantly increasing the punishment from the original trial.It also upheld her bribery conviction, ruling that her conduct had undermined confidence in government integrity.

“As a result of her accepting bribes, public trust in the transparency of state affairs and the fair execution of national policy was undermined,” the court said.Judges added that Kim had failed to accept responsibility and had instead “consistently resorted to excuses,” though they noted her lack of any prior criminal record in determining the sentence.

Kim, 53, appeared in court wearing a white face mask and kept her head lowered as the verdict was delivered.Her legal team told AFP they would appeal the decision to South Korea’s Supreme Court.Kim remained one of the most controversial public figures during Yoon’s presidency, with repeated scandals often overshadowing his administration.

In 2023, secretly recorded footage appeared to show her accepting a luxury Dior handbag, intensifying political backlash and contributing to falling approval ratings for Yoon’s government.The controversy was widely seen as a factor in the ruling party’s defeat in the April 2024 parliamentary elections, where it failed to regain a legislative majority.

Yoon later vetoed three opposition-backed bills seeking investigations into allegations surrounding Kim, including the Dior handbag case, with his final veto issued in November 2024.One week later, he declared martial law, a move that failed and triggered his impeachment, removal from office and eventual sentencing in February this year to life imprisonment for insurrection.

Yoon has appealed that conviction, saying his martial law declaration was made “solely for the sake of the nation.”Another appeal verdict related to his separate five-year sentence for obstruction of justice and other crimes connected to the declaration is expected on Wednesday.

Kim’s bribery case also implicated Han Hak-ja, leader of the Unification Church, who is accused of providing luxury gifts including two Chanel handbags and a Graff necklace.The court ruled Tuesday that all three items constituted bribes.

In the lower court’s January ruling, one of the handbags had not been classified as a bribe because it was allegedly gifted before Yoon’s presidential inauguration.

Han, 83, is standing trial on bribery and other charges and is currently receiving medical treatment after being temporarily released from custody.

Swalwell, a seven-term lawmaker and former contender in California’s gubernatorial race, announced his decision after reports by the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN detailed accusations from multiple women, including claims of sexual assault involving a former employee. He has denied the assault allegations but acknowledged “mistakes in judgment” in a statement posted on social media.

The House Ethics Committee said it had opened an inquiry into whether Swalwell engaged in sexual misconduct toward an employee working under his supervision.

The panel noted that the existence of the investigation does not indicate that any violation has occurred.“I will fight the serious false allegation made against me,” Swalwell said, adding that he would nonetheless step down to avoid distracting from his duties and responsibilities to constituents.

The allegations prompted swift political fallout, with lawmakers from both parties calling for his resignation. Some members of Congress had also pushed for an expulsion vote, increasing pressure on Swalwell to leave office.

California Senator Adam Schiff, who had previously endorsed Swalwell’s gubernatorial bid before withdrawing support, described the situation as “shocking and deeply upsetting” and said the resignation was appropriate.

CNN reported that, in addition to the assault allegations, three other women accused Swalwell of misconduct, including sending unsolicited explicit messages or images. These claims have not been adjudicated.Swalwell’s departure will trigger a special election in his Northern California district, which he won by more than 30 percentage points in 2024.

Under California law, the governor must call a special election within 14 days of a vacancy.The future of the Ethics Committee’s investigation remains uncertain, as such probes are often discontinued when a lawmaker resigns.