Spain's Eliot Ness facing potential fall from grace

AS A young man, Baltasar Garzon pumped gas to work his way through law school. Decades later, as a crusading judge, he went after the likes of Augusto Pinochet and Osama bin Laden. Now, Mr Garzon's meteoric rise is being eclipsed by an equally spectacular fall from grace.

It's a reversal of fortune that could remove one of the world's leading advocates of universal jurisdiction – the idea that some crimes are so egregious they can be prosecuted anywhere.

Spain's Eliot Ness awaits a potentially career-ending trial on charges of knowingly overstepping the bounds of his authority in a probe of Spanish civil war atrocities covered by an amnesty.

Mr Garzon has other cases against him pending, and he reported to the Supreme Court on Monday to testify in one of them, involving jailhouse wiretaps he ordered in a corruption probe.

For many in Spain, the saga goes beyond the issue of whether he has erred or not. They say that Mr Garzon, 54, is being punished for his status as a celebrity – a jet-hopping, workaholic sleuth who loves being in the headlines.

Critics say he has a mixed record winning convictions, cuts procedural corners, and that he's less interested in promoting justice than in promoting Baltasar Garzon.

Many see a simple explanation: colleagues in the Spanish judiciary are simply fed up with the man.

"It comes as no surprise that his colleagues, some conservative and others socialist, are dying to give him a kick," said Florentino Portero, a professor of history at Spain's National Open University.

Mr Garzon was indicted last month in connection with arguably his country's biggest unfinished case: the execution or disappearance of more than 100,000 civilians at the hands of supporters of General Francisco Franco.

If convicted, Mr Garzon does not face jail time but could be removed from the bench for up to 20 years.

Until Mr Garzon acted, there had never been an official inquiry of that dark chapter of Spanish history. Some say his problems are retribution for breaking taboo.

Mr Garzon shot to fame after having Pinochet arrested while the former despot was visiting London in 1998, and trying in vain to have him extradited to Spain for trial over torture and other abuses.

Through this and other cases, his name became synonymous with the concept of universal jurisdiction.

But after receiving complaints from countries targeted in such Spanish probes, such as Israel, Spain changed its law last year so these cases now require a clear link to Spain, such as Spanish victims.

If Mr Garzon is convicted in the case involving the civil war probe, it would effectively end his career as a judge and deal another blow to Spain's role as an advocate of universal jurisdiction.

"Thanks to Garzon, Spain became a symbol of justice for atrocity victims around the world. Now justice itself may be the victim in Spain," Reed Brody, a spokesman for Human Rights Watch, said.

Mr Garzon launched his civil war probe in the summer of 2008, ordering mass graves dug up and telling government agencies to pore over archives in search of information on missing people.

Months later he bowed out in a dispute over jurisdiction, but not before declaring the Franco regime should be charged with crimes against humanity.

Manos Limpias, which calls itself a labour union, filed a complaint against Garzon alleging he started the probe, even though he knew civil war atrocities were covered by an amnesty passed by the Spanish Parliament in 1977, two years after Franco died, as the country was trying to heal and looking to rebuild from the war.

Last year, the Spanish Supreme Court agreed to study the complaint, even though prosecutors said they saw no evidence Garzon committed a crime. An investigating magistrate at the court indicted Garzon last month, setting the stage for a trial in coming months.

Garzon denies wrongdoing, insisting his investigation was legitimate.

Despite the widespread impression that Garzon is being slapped down for being a star, others see a clear political component: they say conservatives in the Supreme Court, elsewhere in the judiciary and in Spanish society just do not want to revisit the war.

Jose Antonio Martin Pallin, a judge emeritus at the Supreme Court, says it is debatable whether Garzon acted properly in launching the inquiry but under no circumstances should he be charged with a crime.

Former prosecutor Mena put it this way: Garzon "put his hand on an electrical cable that had not been disconnected, 70 years later, and he got a big shock."