Operation Marquês Trial Suspended: What's Next for José Sócrates?

Former Prime Minister José Sócrates, the main defendant in Operation Marquês, arrives at the Lisbon Central Criminal Court

Unexpected Suspension of Portugal's Biggest Corruption Trial

When it seemed like everything had been seen in the Operation Marquês trial, the proceedings have now hit an unexpected brake with the suspension of work until at least December 4th. This follows the abandonment of defense that presiding judge Susana Seca attributes to lawyer Pedro Delille.

Judge Susana Seca's decision to suspend the trial, announced this Tuesday, surprised lawyers and journalists present in the courtroom, especially since a window for interruption of work had already opened with Pedro Delille's resignation as José Sócrates' defense lawyer on November 4th, but the magistrate had ruled out a stop at that time.

What Did the Judge Decide This Tuesday?

Judge Susana Seca announced the suspension of the trial hearing until December 4th, declaring void the scheduling of 39 witnesses notified to be questioned during this period. Among the appointments were, for example, the names of two of Sócrates' closest former collaborators: Vítir Escária and Guilherme Dray, elements considered fundamental to the former prime minister's so-called "economic diplomacy" and who were expected on Wednesday.

At the basis of this ruling is José Sócrates' communication to the court declaring that he was notified of Pedro Delille's resignation, that he wants to appoint a new lawyer within the 20-day period that the law grants after the representative's resignation, and that he requests the termination of the functions of the court-appointed public defender assigned to him.

Why Did the Judge Decide to Suspend the Process Now and Not Last Week?

Susana Seca emphasized this Tuesday that the November 4th decision, in which she decided to proceed with the appointment of a public defender for Sócrates and continue with the session, took into account the absence of a norm in the Criminal Procedure Code that "determines the interruption of the trial hearing based on the resignation of a representative, or during the 20-day period granted."

However, the element that made the difference was Sócrates' communication refusing to be defended by public defender José Manuel Ramos and the expressed intention to appoint a new lawyer in the process, to whom "it will be necessary" to grant time for defense preparation.

What Are the Immediate Consequences for Evidence Production?

The suspension of the trial immediately forces the cancellation of all witness interrogations scheduled until December 4th, totaling 39 witnesses. To get an idea, this was practically the same number of witnesses who had already been heard in court since the start of work: 38.

However, there is another more relevant implication in the context of the trial: the possible annulment of evidence produced in two trial sessions that occurred after Pedro Delille's resignation.

This resignation became known on the previous Tuesday, November 4th, when public defender José Manuel Ramos was then appointed to appear in the session. However, on November 4th, one of the most damning testimonies for José Sócrates was heard: that of his former Finance Minister Luís Campos e Cunha.

The former Finance Minister, who was only between March and July 2005 in the first absolute majority socialist government, stated in court that José Sócrates pressured him to remove the board of Caixa Geral de Depósitos (CGD) and appoint Armando Vara. "From the beginning, Eng. Pinto de Sousa [José Sócrates] urged me to dismiss the CGD administration and appoint Armando Vara," said the former governor, adding: "This was discussed repeatedly even before I went to the Government."

Now, this testimony - and all those that followed in the November 4th and 5th sessions - may be annulled. According to judicial sources, Sócrates' future lawyer may request the repetition of procedures from these two days and argue that defense rights were not fully ensured then.

There is an increased risk: that of statute of limitations. Susana Seca admitted in the ruling that the "process has an urgent nature and risk of statute of limitations of crimes in the short term"; later in the afternoon, the court confirmed that "the crimes whose statute of limitations may occur during the first half of 2026 are those of active and passive corruption associated" with the accusation chapter about the Vale do Lobo group and financing granted by CGD.

How Long Can the Trial Remain Suspended? Probably Until January 2026

For now, the Operation Marquês trial will stop for about three weeks, with the cancellation of sessions scheduled until December 4th. However, all lawyers consulted consider it "plausible" that the trial will remain interrupted for longer, namely until January 2026, given the 20-day period that began counting on November 6th for José Sócrates to indicate a new representative, plus the time the court will grant for this lawyer to consult the process.

To this circumstance are added the judicial holidays for the Christmas and New Year period, which dictate an interruption of trials between December 20th and January 4th.

Can Sócrates' New Lawyer Copy Delille and Resign, Blocking the Trial's Restart?

Yes, and Judge Susana Seca herself recognized this circumstance. "The Presiding Judge does not ignore that, in theory, the interruption of the trial hearing allows that in the future the representative constituted in the process may again resign, and so successively, with other representatives, producing a dilatory effect intolerable for the good administration of justice that it is up to the Courts to ensure," the magistrate stated in her ruling.

The same understanding was confirmed by several lawyers consulted on this matter, considering it "perfectly possible that such a scenario may materialize" in the short term.

Despite this, Susana Seca has already expressed the idea that she will be very attentive to possible steps by José Sócrates in that direction: "The presiding judge will weigh as she always weighs, case by case, the dilatory nature of a certain procedural expedient in the use of hearing direction powers."

What Analysis Did the Judge Make of This Situation?

Susana Seca did not hesitate to describe this situation of the former representative's resignation as a dilatory maneuver, noting that it is an act practiced "with abusive use of procedural mechanisms with the patent and implicit purpose of delaying the progress of work."

In this sense, she reiterated that the "dilatory intention refers to the resignation" of Pedro Delille from José Sócrates' defense, "both for the grounds invoked for the resignation, and for the absence from the trial hearing and abandonment of the Defense, in addition to the global behavior adopted in the trial hearing."

What Mechanisms Does Susana Seca Have Available to Counter Dilatory Maneuvers?

It is difficult to point out possible solutions for a situation never seen in major judicial processes in Portugal.

"Not even the judge knows, because this is so original that it has no legal framework," highlighted a judicial source, while another specialist considered there are no brakes beyond a possible "sanction for abusive use of the process," but that there is "margin for the court to proceed and impose a public defender" on José Sócrates.

José Sócrates and his now former lawyer Pedro Delille

On the other hand, and considering this eclipse in José Sócrates' representation in the hearing, the lawyers consulted understand that it would make sense to revoke the former prime minister's absence exemption and require him to appear in court, especially since no professional activity of the former ruler is known. One of these sources even considers that this is what Susana Seca should have done last week.

"I would suspend the procedure, notify the defendant to appear the next day, notify him of the resignation personally, start counting the period immediately and suspend the hearing until he appoints a new representative, notifying immediately that if he does not appoint a representative within 20 days, a public defender would be appointed. And give him this warning personally; he may have been prime minister, but this is not a joke," declared one source, warning that Sócrates "is in a position of strength with the judge."