A criminal lawyer praised Garzón, telling me about many policemen who, when they had to apply for permission to a judge to carry out an action against ETA, waited for Garzón to be on duty at the Audiencia Nacional, because he always said yes. This anecdote illustrates the character of a judge committed to the triumph of Justice -which is not necessarily the triumph of the law- and a judge willing to take risks in his particular war. In the case of the wiretapping of communications between inmates of a penitentiary center, accused in the 'Gürtel case', and their defense lawyers, art. 51 of the General Organic Law of Prisons (LOGP), provided that such communications could only be intercepted after a court order and (cumulatively) in cases of terrorism, which did not occur.

Garzón perhaps forgot that the wiretaps, even if authorized, affect one of the idols worshiped by lawyers, judges and prosecutors: the right of defense. The criminal procedural systems of our environment are usually classified into two types: inquisitorial and adversarial systems. In the former, it is the judge who mainly carries out the research and the oral discussion between the parties does not exist or is limited. In the adversarial system, both the research and the presentation of the evidence and interrogation of witnesses are directed by the parties, with the judge occupying a distant position, more of an arbiter of the process than a judge on the merits.

The Spanish system would straddle between both systems, but the right of defense remains sacred in both cases. This right must allow ample freedom for the accused to prepare his arguments together with his lawyers. If in this process these arguments are passed on to the 'opposing party' -the investigating judge or prosecutor-, the principle of defense suffers, since the accuser is being given an advantage over the accused. Not everything goes in the fight against crime and when we consider how to obtain evidence against corrupt people, we must also bear in mind that they will only be corrupt when the judge declares it so in a heavy and well-documented sentence.