Investigative secrecy procedure (secreto de sumario)

Investigative secrecy procedure (secreto de sumario) is a judicial measure that keeps a criminal case confidential while authorities investigate allegations that could endanger people or cause serious harm if disclosed prematurely. In the novel, the measure explains why a homicide investigation in Pamplona remains unknown even to Amaia Salazar, and shows secrecy operating both as protection and as a barrier to information.

Purpose and operation

A judge orders secrecy after a complaint made in Madrid is transferred to Pamplona because the alleged crime took place in Navarra. The decision is made immediately, before the matter becomes public. The judge’s stated reasons are the delicacy of the allegations, the social alarm their disclosure could provoke, and the harm that an unproven accusation might inflict on those implicated. Security is the overriding concern: the man who reported the case lives concealed and under both police and ecclesiastical protection.

The procedure therefore does more than keep allegations from the public. It limits who can know that the case exists while the protected complainant remains at risk. The account gives no detailed legal formula for the order, but makes its practical effect plain: the information is restricted enough that Amaia, despite her familiarity with homicide cases in Pamplona, has no knowledge of this one.

Secrecy and Amaia’s investigation

The concealed case becomes visible to Amaia through another person’s knowledge. She is astonished to discover that someone outside the police service knows of a homicide investigation she has never encountered. Her recollections then connect the newly disclosed matter to the investigation’s existing trail: the children’s deaths, the old group at Argi Beltz, altered death certificates, and the empty grave of her sister. The secrecy order has protected information, but it has also kept a potentially important connection outside her investigative picture.

The case’s route from a complaint in Madrid to a court in Pamplona further complicates access. Its transfer reflects the alleged location of the crime, while the initial complaint and police involvement belong to another jurisdiction. Secrecy is thus presented within a wider problem of divided authority: even when information may be relevant, investigators do not necessarily encounter it through their ordinary local channels.

Procedure, disclosure, and its costs

The novel places the formal secrecy order alongside other disputes over who may authorize investigative steps and how much evidence is needed. When Amaia asks to exhume the buried children, the judge stresses the burden such action would impose on families and the public, and insists on the need for compelling evidence before authorizing the exhumations. This is not the same as the secrecy order, but it clarifies the procedural environment in which sensitive information and intrusive investigative measures are controlled.

Cross-border efforts sharpen the tension. After Markina refuses permission to open graves, Amaia considers seeking authorization in France without first explaining the full investigative background. The French judge challenges her for proceeding without regard to the limits set by the Spanish judge. Markina later says that he had supported Amaia’s unorthodox methods because of her results, but that she crossed a line by going around him. These encounters distinguish the urgency of uncovering the truth from the authority to act: secrecy and jurisdictional limits can frustrate an investigation, but evading them carries institutional and procedural consequences.

Information control and investigative risk

A separate inquiry by the Internal Affairs Department shows how vulnerable investigations can be to premature disclosure. Its officers tell Amaia that a person targeted in a search appeared to have known in advance that it would take place, and that she had suspected someone on her Elizondo team of warning that person. The episode does not identify this leak as a breach of the formal secrecy order in the concealed Pamplona case, but it reinforces the book’s broader concern with controlling sensitive investigative information. Confidentiality can protect a complainant and prevent unproven accusations from causing harm; when information escapes, it can also compromise searches and erode trust within a team.