The judge María Tardón asks the Civil Guard to clarify whether it received alerts before the massive entry into Ceuta.

DEMOCRAT accesses the provision by which the magistrate María Tardón expands the investigation prompted by the complaint from Iustitia Europa and requests information about the deployed device, the rescues, the fatalities, and the possible warnings prior to the crisis.

3 minutes

EuropaPress 7700796 cruz roja organizacion sur sur reparten alimentos basicos agosto 2026 ceuta

EuropaPress 7700796 cruz roja organizacion sur sur reparten alimentos basicos agosto 2026 ceuta

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

Last updated

3 minutes

Most read

The National Court has opened a new line of investigation into the migration crisis in Ceuta by ordering the Information Headquarters of the Civil Guard to report specifically on whether any of its units received alerts or information prior to the massive entry of citizens from Morocco on July 30 and 31. The order, which has been accessed by DEMÓCRATA, represents a new impetus to the proceedings opened following the complaint filed by Iustitia Europa and focuses on one of the most controversial aspects of the management of the crisis.

The resolution, signed on August 4 by Judge María Tardón, head of the Instruction Section, Plaza No. 3, of the Central Court of the National Court, agrees to carry out new proceedings within the Preliminary Proceedings 64/2026, opened to investigate a possible crime against the peace and independence of the State.

Among them, it orders the Information Headquarters of the Civil Guard to send a detailed report on the operation deployed during the massive irregular entry from Moroccan territory.

The doubt of prior alerts

However, the aspect of greatest political and judicial significance of the order is that the National Court does not consider the issue of possible prior alerts closed.

The judge expressly requests that it be reported whether any unit of the Civil Guard in Ceuta received, in the days leading up to the events, communications or warnings that allowed for the anticipation of what happened. This is a line of investigation that is especially relevant, as the Government has publicly maintained that there were no alerts anticipating the crisis.

The order does not conclude that such alerts existed, but does indicate that the judicial body considers it necessary to verify this before dismissing that possibility. With this request, the National Court seeks to determine what information the State Security Forces and Corps had before the massive entry, what was the operational response deployed, and whether the actions taken corresponded to the information available at that time.

In addition to the possible alerts, the judge requests information about the device deployed by the Civil Guard to address the crisis, the rescue operations carried out in Spanish territorial waters, and the known circumstances regarding the individuals located during those days. She also requires data on the fatalities, including, where applicable, the cause and date of death, as well as the identification of the survivors for whom information has been gathered.

Was there a coordinated action with Morocco?

These proceedings respond to several of the questions raised by Iustitia Europa in the complaint that gave rise to the procedure. The political formation, which acts as the complainant in the case under the legal direction of lawyer Luis María Pardo, argues that it is necessary to clarify what information the authorities had prior to the mass entry, what measures were taken to respond to the situation, and whether the events could have been the result of a coordinated action from Moroccan territory.

After the resolution was made known, Pardo stated that the investigation "continues to advance in the direction we pointed out from the very first moment" and emphasized that now it will be the Civil Guard itself that must officially inform about the deployed device, the victims, and, especially, about the possible alerts received before the events.

Brussels gathers the Committee on Civil Liberties and Justice

The expansion of the proceedings coincides, moreover, with a moment of growing international attention on the Ceuta crisis. This Thursday, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament will debate the situation recorded in the autonomous city following the proposal promoted by the European People's Party, incorporating the episode into the community agenda due to its implications regarding border control, immigration, and security.

From Iustitia Europa, they believe that this judicial evolution reinforces the need to fully clarify what happened before political conclusions can be drawn. The organization argues that, while the National Court continues to investigate whether there was a coordinated action and whether there was sufficient prior information to anticipate the crisis, some member states of the European Union have chosen to adopt measures that, in their opinion, shift the consequences of the episode to the state that suffered the migratory pressure.

With the provision known as DEMÓCRATA, the investigation now enters a particularly sensitive phase. The information sent by the Civil Guard will allow the National Court to determine if there were intelligence elements or prior warnings about the massive entry from Morocco, how the response operation was organized, and if there are new facts that justify the continuation of an investigation that has already placed the Ceuta crisis at the center of judicial and political debate.

 

More key points, information and questions with FREN

AI-GENERATED CONTENT

What is the current status of the parliamentary processing of proposals on border control and migration crisis management in Spain?

Currently, the central piece under parliamentary processing on migration crisis management in Spain is the bill derived from Royal Decree‑Law 2/2025 on migrant minors and extraordinary contingencies, which remains stuck in the Congress at the amendment stage. Alongside this, the PP registered in July 2026 an organic law proposal to extend border rejection to sea entries in Ceuta and Melilla, still at a very early stage, pending the Plenary's decision on whether to even consider it and, if applicable, the "single reading". Other more substantial proposals, such as the comprehensive reform of the Immigration Law promoted by Sumar or the delegation of migration powers to Catalonia, have been rejected and their processing concluded. In parallel, the Congress and the Senate have approved several motions and non-legislative proposals urging the Government to strengthen border control, cooperation with Frontex, and return mechanisms, but without direct normative effects.

1. Bill on migration contingencies and unaccompanied minors

Royal Decree‑Law 2/2025, of March 18, on "urgent measures to guarantee the best interests of children and adolescents in extraordinary migration contingency situations," was approved by the Council of Ministers (Council reference) and published in the BOE on March 19, 2025 (BOE 19‑03‑2025). Subsequently, the Congress agreed to process it as a bill (file 121/000055). According to executive information, the amendment period has been extended and is open until September 2, 2026, which means:

  • The initiative is formally still "alive" in the Congress but stuck at the article amendment phase.
  • It has not yet reached the committee or commission report stage.
  • It has not passed to the Senate.

The text strengthens state instruments to declare situations of "extraordinary migration contingency," articulate a Solidarity Response Plan, and reorganize the territorial distribution of unaccompanied foreign minors, key in managing crises such as those in the Canary Islands, Ceuta, and Melilla. This bill is currently the main ongoing legislative route directly affecting migration crisis management and distribution among autonomous communities.

2. Recent reforms of the Immigration Law (regulatory route)

Although not parliamentary initiatives, they frame the legislative debate. The Regulation of Organic Law 4/2000 was approved by Royal Decree 1155/2024 (BOE 20‑11‑2024) and later amended by Royal Decree 316/2026, of April 14 (BOE‑A‑2026‑8284). This latter regulation has served, among other things, to implement extraordinary regularization of foreign persons and adjust the reception system, but its approval was done via regulation, not through a debated law in Parliament.

3. Proposals on border control: hot returns and Ceuta/Melilla

Following the Supreme Court ruling of July 2026 limiting border rejection to those who surpass physical land containment elements, the PP has registered a organic law proposal to amend the tenth additional provision of the Immigration Law and extend border rejection to irregular sea entries in Ceuta and Melilla. According to the newspaper Demócrata, the initiative was registered on July 16 and published by the Congress, but:

  • There is no record that the debate on consideration has yet taken place.
  • The PP itself demands that it be processed "immediately and in a single reading," but that decision must first be made by the Plenary.

That is, the proposal is at a very early stage of the legislative procedure: registered and published, pending the Plenary's decision on whether and how to process it. Meanwhile, the political debate on this reform is more framed as a Ceuta crisis than as effective progress of the file.

4. Initiatives already rejected or concluded

  • The Bill proposal to amend Organic Law 4/2000 registered by the Plurinational Group Sumar (122/000123), focused precisely on extraordinary migration contingencies and redistribution of minors, was rejected by the Congress Plenary on October 5, 2024, and its processing concluded (initiative file).
  • The Organic Law Proposal to delegate state immigration powers to the Autonomous Community of Catalonia (PSOE–Junts, 122/000172) was rejected on September 23, 2025, by 177 votes to 173, being archived (rejection text).

Both cases involved structural reforms impacting flow management, minors, and border control; today they are not part of the legislative "pipeline."

5. Motions and non-legislative proposals on border control

Although they do not have the force of law, several recent initiatives guide the agenda:

  • The Congress Plenary approved in March 2025 a motion urging the Government to request the "immediate deployment of Frontex forces on the Canary route" to support migration crisis management (Congress note).
  • In October 2025, another motion approved in the Plenary urged modifying the Penal Code and Asylum Law, strengthening Civil Guard and National Police resources, and operationally cooperating with Frontex to combat irregular immigration and mafias (note on returns and expulsions).
  • In the Senate, a motion by the Popular Group on "migration pressure and urgent reinforcement of border control and reception resources in the city of Ceuta" was definitively approved and published on May 18, 2026 (Senate BOCG).

These motions represent constant political pressure to strengthen border control and coordination with the EU, but their execution depends on the Government, which is legislating mainly via regulation and royal decree-law.

6. Regularization and ordinary flow management

Alongside border control reforms, the debate on extraordinary migrant regularization and updating the reception system has had a strong parliamentary component, although the key normative element has been regulatory (Royal Decree 316/2026). Demócrata recalls that the former ILP on regularization was "paralyzed" in the Chamber and that much of the effective regulation has shifted to the Immigration regulation and its developments (Demócrata analysis).

In sum, as of August 5, 2026, the picture is clear: a major bill on migration contingencies and minors at the amendment stage; a new PP bill on border rejection still at the starting gate; and a set of motions, non-legislative proposals, and Senate agreements already approved that pressure to strengthen border control and crisis coordination, but not yet translating into a fully effective package of laws.

What specific content does the bill developing Royal Decree-Law 2/2025 on migration contingencies and minors contain? What is the exact parliamentary status of the PP's bill on hot returns by sea in Ceuta and Melilla (file number and next planned steps)? How are the motions and non-legislative proposals of the Congress and Senate on Frontex and border control being applied in practice?

What are the competencies and functions of Magistrate María Tardón according to the Organic Law of the Judiciary, and what has been her professional trajectory?

According to available sources, María Tardón is a magistrate of the National Court who acts as an investigating judge in complex criminal cases. Under the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) and the Criminal Procedure Law, her functions focus on investigating serious crimes, ordering proceedings, precautionary measures, and referring cases for trial. The consulted news allow outlining her practical competencies (what decisions she makes in procedures) and some of the cases she has handled in recent years, but they do not provide a complete biography or detailed data on her prior career. No further professional or curricular information is available in the consulted sources, so the portrait of her trajectory must be limited to these elements.

Competencies and functions according to the LOPJ and judicial practice

Although the news do not cite specific LOPJ articles related to María Tardón, they do show how she exercises the typical competencies of a magistrate in the criminal jurisdiction of the National Court. The LOPJ configures judges and magistrates as holders of judicial power, responsible for judging and enforcing what is judged, under the principle of independence highlighted, for example, in an interview with Enrique Arnaldo published in the newspaper Demócrata, which stresses that judges do not depend on any external or internal power and are only subject to the law.

In María Tardón's case, this general function is specified in several competencies observed in known rulings:

  • Direction of criminal investigation: she acts as an investigating magistrate in the National Court, which involves opening investigations (preliminary proceedings), ordering evidence, and gathering information from security forces.
  • Adoption of personal precautionary measures: she can order provisional imprisonment or release of the investigated persons, assessing flight risk, evidence destruction, or reoffending risk.
  • Control of the court's jurisdiction: she must determine whether the investigated facts fall under the National Court's jurisdiction, noting that this issue may remain "to be resolved" in initial phases.
  • Relationship with the Public Prosecutor's Office: she communicates the opening of proceedings to the Prosecutor and acts considering their reports, although her decisions are independent.
  • Legal assessment of complex facts: she defines possible crimes (e.g., against state security, criminal organization, facilitation of illegal immigration) and the potential responsibility of authorities or individuals, based on filed complaints.

These functions are clearly illustrated in the order where "National Court magistrate María Tardón" opens proceedings to investigate whether the Ceuta migration crisis was a "concerted action." According to Demócrata, she requests a detailed report from UCRIF on the "massive irregular entry" of tens of thousands of people from Morocco, orders preliminary proceedings, requests identification elements of possible participants, and notifies the Prosecutor, all while leaving open the question of the National Court's criminal jurisdiction (Ceuta migration crisis).

In another case, El País reports that "María Tardón, investigating magistrate of the National Court, has sent to provisional prison" a former high-ranking UN official, Vitaly Vanshelboim, wanted by the United States for alleged million-dollar bribes. The judge, supported by the Prosecutor, orders his imprisonment due to a "high flight risk" (Vanshelboim case). Here is the exercise of the power to order provisional imprisonment and cooperate in extradition procedures.

Finally, Demócrata details that, in a possible data trafficking case, "National Court magistrate María Tardón has granted freedom" to YouTuber Álvaro Martín ("Valyrio"), initially imprisoned for alleged links to a network dedicated to theft and commercialization of data, allegedly coordinated by a former Interior official (Valyrio case). This reflects the power to review precautionary measures, substituting imprisonment with release under established conditions.

Known professional trajectory

The analyzed sources allow affirming that María Tardón is a magistrate of the National Court and that, at least between 2025 and 2026, she serves as an investigating judge in criminal matters of special complexity and public relevance:

  • In 2025, she appears as the investigating magistrate directing the extradition procedure and ordering provisional imprisonment of former UN official Vitaly Vanshelboim, for alleged bribery, electronic fraud, and money laundering, according to the cited El País news.
  • That same year, according to Demócrata, she investigates a case of theft and data trafficking involving YouTuber Valyrio, reviewing the investigated person's personal situation and ordering his release.
  • In 2026, according to other Demócrata information, she initiates proceedings on the Ceuta migration crisis, requesting police reports and analyzing whether the massive migrant entry could be a concerted action with criminal relevance and National Court jurisdiction.

Beyond these specific cases, the news do not provide data on her year of entry into the judiciary, previous assignments, specialization, judicial association, or possible governing positions within the National Court or other bodies. Nor have any agreements from the General Council of the Judiciary or official BOE notes explicitly mentioning her been found in the consulted sources. Therefore, no further information is available in the consulted sources about her prior professional trajectory or other institutional responsibilities.

What specific cases, besides the Ceuta, Valyrio, and Vanshelboim cases, has Magistrate María Tardón investigated in the National Court? How is it practically determined whether a case like the Ceuta migration crisis falls under the National Court's criminal jurisdiction? What differences exist between the functions of an investigating magistrate of the National Court and those of an ordinary investigating judge in a first instance and instruction court?

How many parliamentary initiatives on the Ceuta migration crisis have been presented and debated in the Congress of Deputies during the current legislature?

With the available parliamentary information, it is not possible to provide an exact and complete figure of how many initiatives in the Congress on the Ceuta migration crisis have been presented and debated in the current XV Legislature. The searches exploited have focused on legislative initiatives (bills and proposals) and do not systematically cover questions, non-legislative proposals (PNL), interpellations, or hearings. Still, several general legislative initiatives on immigration and migrant minors explicitly mentioning Ceuta as a particularly affected territory are identified. For an exhaustive count of "all" initiatives (including government oversight), a comprehensive treatment of the Congress database would be essential, which is not reflected in the consulted sources.

Scope of available information

The parliamentary searches accessed:

  • Are limited to legislative initiatives (bills and proposals).
  • Do not provide a global count of written or oral questions, PNLs, motions, interpellations, or hearings specifically focused on the Ceuta migration crisis or the May 2021 events.
  • Do offer several legislative texts where Ceuta explicitly appears in the context of migration pressure, especially regarding unaccompanied migrant minors and unequal territorial impact.

Therefore, the answer can only approximate the number of major legislative initiatives linked to this matter, not the entire oversight activity.

Main legislative initiatives affecting Ceuta

1. Reform of the Immigration Law (LO 4/2000) – Bill Proposal

In the XV Legislature, the Bill Proposal to amend Organic Law 4/2000, on the rights and freedoms of foreigners in Spain and their social integration, jointly promoted by the Socialist Group and SUMAR (file 122/000123), has been presented. Its file can be consulted on the Congress website (initiative detail) and its full text in the corresponding BOCG.

Its statement of reasons indicates that migration pressure affects territories such as the Canary Islands and the City of Ceuta with special intensity, explicitly mentioning the increase of unaccompanied foreign minors and agreements for their transfer from the Canary Islands and Ceuta to other communities. It is a structural scope initiative, broader than the May 2021 crisis, but normatively frames the recurring migration situation in Ceuta.

This bill proposal was admitted for processing and debated in Plenary for consideration, and according to available information, it was finally rejected, concluding its processing.

2. Bill derived from Royal Decree-Law 2/2025

Another key piece is the Bill approving urgent measures to guarantee the best interests of children and adolescents in extraordinary migration contingency situations, derived from Royal Decree‑Law 2/2025 (file 121/000055). Its file is on the website (bill detail) and the text in the BOCG.

The bill addresses extraordinary migration contingencies and again explicitly refers to the Canary Islands and the Cities of Ceuta and Melilla as territories particularly affected in receiving migrants, especially unaccompanied minors. It cites, for example, transfers of minors from the Canary Islands and Ceuta agreed in the Sectoral Conference on Childhood and Adolescence.

This text has been debated in Plenary for the ratification of the Royal Decree-Law and is currently being processed as a bill in committee, with successive extensions of amendment deadlines. It is, therefore, a presented and debated initiative directly impacting the management of the Ceuta migration crisis (especially regarding minors).

3. Vox Bill Proposal on registry and illegal immigration

Also in this legislature is the Bill Proposal to amend Law 7/1985, Regulating the Bases of Local Regime, to modify the municipal registry in cases of occupation and illegal immigration, presented by Vox (file 122/000039). Its file is available on the Congress website (proposal detail) and its rejection in the BOCG.

Its focus is more general (occupation and irregular immigration and their reflection in the registry), not centered on Ceuta, although it is part of the political debate on immigration management. It was debated in Plenary in the consideration session and rejected, so it also forms part of the debated initiatives in this thematic block, even if not specific to Ceuta.

4. Initiatives on asylum and international protection

Additionally, a Bill Proposal on access to asylum rights and international protection requests in embassies and consulates (file 122/000071), presented by the Plurinational Group SUMAR, has been identified. Its file can be seen on the website (asylum proposal detail) and its text in the BOCG. It addresses safe access to international protection against irregular routes and mentions migration crises in high influx areas such as the Canary Islands and the Mediterranean, but no direct reference to Ceuta or the May 2021 events is found in the consulted sources.

An earlier version of this same initiative (file 122/000049) was finally withdrawn, as recorded in the BOCG.

Conclusion on the number of initiatives

In view of the above, it can be stated that:

  • In the XV Legislature, there are at least two major legislative initiatives debated (the reform of LO 4/2000 and the bill derived from RDL 2/2025) explicitly mentioning Ceuta in the context of migration contingencies and migrant minors.
  • Other bill proposals on immigration and asylum (such as Vox's on registry and SUMAR's on asylum) are part of the general debate framework, although not always specifically focused on the May 2021 "Ceuta migration crisis."
  • No data is available, from the consulted sources, on the total number of oversight initiatives (questions, PNLs, hearings, interpellations) related to the Ceuta migration crisis or their breakdown between presented and debated.

Therefore, any overall figure including all initiative types would be speculative and cannot be rigorously provided based on the available information.

What specific content does the bill derived from Royal Decree-Law 2/2025 introduce regarding migrant minors arriving in Ceuta? Which groups voted for and against the Immigration Law reform bill mentioning Ceuta? What mechanisms for distributing migrant minors from Ceuta to other autonomous communities have been debated in the Congress?

Play

Test your knowledge with FREN!

How much do you know about this topic? Answer the following 3 questions.

Which judicial body has ordered the Civil Guard to report on possible prior alerts before the mass entry into Ceuta?

Question 1 of 3

What is the main objective of the investigation opened by the National Court regarding the Ceuta crisis?

Question 2 of 3

Which European parliamentary group has promoted the debate on the Ceuta crisis in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs?

Question 3 of 3

Hola, soy Fren. ¿Cómo te ayudo?