The public prosecutor’s office has sought a prison sentence of almost two years for the mayor of Estepona, José María García Urbano (PP), for ... the alleged offences of perverting the course of justice and embezzlement. The charges are in connection with the case concerning the appointment of a woman, C.P.B., for two months at the town hall of the Costa del Sol town, with whom he was in “a romantic relationship” and without her having to carry out any work.
In the statement of provisional conclusions submitted to the civil and preliminary investigation division of Estepona magistrates’ court, to which SUR has had access, the public prosecutor’s office is seeking a sentence of one year and eleven months’ imprisonment for García Urbano. It also seeks the additional penalty of special disqualification from standing for election, as well as disqualification from holding public office or employment for five years and eleven months.
These sentencing recommendations represent a reduction compared with those requested when the legal proceedings were still on track for a trial before a jury (the mayor lodged an appeal and the court ruled in his favour, meaning he will now be tried by a professional court); at that time, the prosecution had sought five and a half years’ imprisonment and a ten-year ban on holding public office or employment.
Payment to the local council and social security
An amendment to the sentencing request, as explained by the public prosecutor’s office in its submission, which states that, once the legal proceedings had commenced, José María García Urbano paid into the municipal coffers the sum of 5,276.92 euros, corresponding to the net amount received by C.P. B. in the form of wages, while in June 2026 he paid 2,589.97 euros to the general treasury of the social security in respect of the social security contributions on those wages.
These payments "settled" all the expenses incurred as a result of C.P.B.’s "improper contractual relationship". It should be noted that the public prosecutor’s office maintains in its submission that, in February 2023, the mayor appointed this woman - “with whom he was in a romantic relationship” - to a position of trust “knowing full well that she would never carry out any work (...) to the detriment of the municipal assets”.
With regard to C. P. B., the public prosecutor considers her to be a cooperating accomplice in the alleged offences of perverting the course of justice and embezzlement, and is seeking a sentence of four years and six months’ imprisonment and a ban on holding public office or employment for eight years.
The PSOE, acting as a private prosecutor, is seeking a prison sentence of five years and six months and a ten-year ban from holding public office
The case brought by the private prosecutor, the PSOE, in its submission of provisional conclusions, requested that a trial be opened against José María García Urbano and C. P. B. It sought a sentence of five years and six months’ imprisonment and a ten-year disqualification from public office for the mayor, and two years’ imprisonment and a six-year disqualification from public office for the woman.
“There is no evidence of a criminal offence,” according to the defence
For its part, the defence team for the mayor of Estepona has expressed its disagreement with the court order and will lodge an appeal, arguing that “there is no evidence of a criminal offence to justify continuing the proceedings”, according to sources consulted.
In this regard, the defence argued that municipal reports from the human resources department have confirmed the duties carried out in that post, as well as the service provided under that contract. “Witness statements were also provided regarding that person’s attendance and the work they carried out. What is more, the court order itself acknowledges their presence at the town hall,” the sources added.
The defence team insisted that no offence had been committed and that they were completely unconcerned about these proceedings, “convinced that the legal proceedings will prove the accusations to be false and demonstrate that the procurement process took place without any criminal offence being committed”.