Debate continues in Spain over contracts signed by the company of entrepreneur Juan Carlos Barrabés, with which Begoña Gómez was associated. Following the publication of a comprehensive report spanning more than three hundred pages, it has become clear that the investigation is only gaining momentum. Now, the focus is shifting to how these contracts were implemented, not just the process by which they were awarded.
A new document is being prepared for submission to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The reason is that the case involves funds allocated from the EU budget. In the spotlight are three major contracts awarded to Barrabés’s firm. The total amount is €8.4 million, distributed by Red.es, an organization leading the country’s digital business transformation.
Earlier, experts identified a number of violations in the distribution of these funds. In their view, the procedure was carried out in breach of the law, and the mechanism may have been designed so that the winner was predetermined. This allowed Red.es to independently choose who would receive financing, without involving independent specialists in the process.
Initially, auditors focused on analyzing the stages of contract preparation and distribution. However, European investigators later insisted on reviewing the entire cycle—from planning through execution. They want to know whether the conditions of the contracts were fulfilled and if the results met the stated requirements.
Due to the large volume of documents and the need to obtain further clarifications from Red.es, the preparation of the report was delayed. The responses provided by the organization did not satisfy the experts. There were especially many questions about the application evaluation system, which resulted in the Barrabés company gaining an advantage. Representatives of Red.es explained that the assessment was “dynamic” and could not be precisely described.
In the near future, auditors will also need to consider whether the evaluation formulas used were standard across all Red.es tenders or applied selectively. It is already clear that the subjective component of the assessment carried more weight than was stated officially, which may have benefited a particular participant. The defense maintains that this practice was also used in other cases and, therefore, this is not a matter of discrimination.
The investigation is ongoing, and its results could affect not only the fate of specific contracts but also the reputation of government bodies responsible for allocating European funds. Questions regarding the transparency and objectivity of the procedures remain unresolved.
