Subscribe
The ongoing case involving Sumar politician Íñigo Errejón and actress Elisa Mouliaá has cast a harsh light on the contradictions and inconsistencies within Spain’s left-wing political landscape. The unfolding scandal, centred on allegations of sexual assault, has not only raised troubling questions about Errejón’s conduct but has also exposed the apparent double standards within a movement that claims to champion dignity, equality, and respect. As the case develops, it becomes increasingly evident that political interests often take precedence over ethical consistency.
Elisa Mouliaá has accused Errejón of sexual assault at a party in September 2021, alleging that he engaged in non-consensual touching and exhibited invasive, humiliating behaviour. According to her testimony, Errejón led her to a private room, closed the door, and subjected her to unwanted advances, including kissing and touching her against her will. Mouliaá described feeling paralysed by fear, rendering her unable to resist effectively until she eventually managed to escape.
Errejón has vehemently denied the allegations, insisting that their interaction was consensual. He claims they had exchanged messages on social media prior to the encounter and that nothing inappropriate took place. However, his version of events has been marred by inconsistencies, further fuelling scepticism about his credibility. This inconsistency, coupled with his defiant and dismissive demeanour during his testimony, suggests an alarming sense of impunity—one that appears to stem from his political stature and connections.
What is perhaps most concerning is not just Errejón’s alleged actions but the response—or lack thereof—of his political allies and self-proclaimed feminists.
Despite the seriousness of the accusations, leading figures from the Spanish left, including Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and Deputy Prime Minister Yolanda Díaz, have responded with notable silence or dismissive comments. Given that feminism is a cornerstone of their political agenda, their failure to address the allegations with the urgency they deserve reveals a troubling inconsistency between their rhetoric and their actions.
This silence stands in stark contrast to the left’s responses in similar cases when political opponents or public figures outside their circle were implicated.
However, when one of their own faces accusations, the response is conveniently measured, if not entirely absent. This selective application of feminist principles highlights how the movement is often weaponised for political gain rather than upheld as a universal standard of conduct.
Errejón has adopted a strategy of deflection and victimisation. He has chosen to present himself as the target of a political smear campaign. This tactic—common among public figures facing serious allegations—serves only to diminish the broader fight against sexual violence and undermine the credibility of survivors seeking justice.
The handling of this case by Spain’s left-wing leadership underscores a deeper issue: the erosion of moral integrity in favour of political expediency.
Former Minister of Equality and current MEP, Irene Montero, usually vocal on matters of gender violence, has remained conspicuously silent, further highlighting the selective approach to justice within the government. Her reluctance to address the allegations against Errejón raises questions about the credibility of her advocacy and the sincerity of her commitment to women’s rights.
The broader implications of this case cannot be ignored. It has exposed the fragility of the feminist narrative championed by the Spanish left, revealing it as a tool that is wielded selectively based on political convenience. The unwillingness to hold one of their own accountable damages the movement’s credibility and sends a disheartening message to victims of sexual violence—namely, that justice is not blind, but politically motivated.
Ultimately, the Errejón scandal represents more than just an isolated incident; it is symptomatic of a larger pattern within Spanish politics, where ideological commitments are frequently sacrificed to protect influential figures.