The Pujol family is back in the spotlight: all seven children of former Catalan leader Jordi Pujol attended the second court hearing over the origins of their fortune, hidden in Andorra. While the court had excused them from attending except during questioning, the siblings chose to appear together. In the courtroom, located in San Fernando de Henares (Madrid’s industrial zone), they presented a united front despite internal disagreements over their defense strategy.
While their 95-year-old father rarely leaves the house and their mother, Marta Ferrusola, passed away a year and a half ago, the Pujol children are showing solidarity as they face the threat of lengthy prison terms—from eight to twenty-nine years. But behind this public unity, four distinct defense strategies have emerged since the first moments of the trial. All are accused of forming a criminal organization and money laundering, yet each is pursuing their own path to acquittal.
Divided roles: four defense strategies
The family’s lawyers have devised a complex defense: Jordi Pujol’s team is acting as if the case barely concerns him. His representatives have not filed any motions on his behalf, and his written statement is only a few pages long. Their main line of argument is that the family’s wealth was inherited from Jordi’s father, Florenci Pujol, who allegedly moved money abroad in 1980 out of concern for his family’s future during Spain’s transition to democracy.
The eldest son, Jordi Pujol Ferrusola, has become the main legal fighter in the case. He faces the highest sentence—29 years. His lawyer, Cristóbal Martell, is trying to challenge the charges by pointing out their lack of specifics: according to him, the prosecution does not cite a single example of illegal government contract allocation, and all accusations are based on abstract claims. Other defense attorneys later adopted this same strategy.
Political subtext and distancing tactics
Two brothers, Josep and Oriol, emphasize the political dimension of the case. They claim to be victims of the so-called “Operación Cataluña”—unofficial police actions against supporters of regional independence. Oriol, the only child who followed in his father’s political footsteps, has a separate attorney. In court, they recalled pressure put on bankers in Andorra and the controversial testimony of Jordi Jr.’s former girlfriend, aiming to have the case dismissed.
The other four—Marta, Mireia, Pere, and Oleguer—have chosen to keep a low profile. Their lawyer presented the court with a 1985 book that already mentioned Florenci Pujol’s foreign assets, to support the claim that the money’s origin was legal. They also provided documents showing these family members had no knowledge of financial matters and did not manage the assets. Prosecutors are seeking eight-year prison sentences for each of them for profiting from illicit income and helping to hide it.
Criticism of the Prosecution and the Other Defendants’ Stance
The lawyers representing the ten entrepreneurs who are co-defendants with the Puchol family have also challenged the prosecution. They argue that the prosecution has failed to clearly define the alleged crimes committed by their clients. According to the defense, the indictment is full of general statements and lacks specific facts that could be contested in court. One attorney noted that after 13 years of investigation, the source of the income still hasn’t been established, while another questioned why his client is accused of document forgery when there is not a single piece of evidence indicating falsification.
During the hearing, questions were raised: how can one defend against accusations if it’s unclear what exactly they entail? Some lawyers ironically remarked that they don’t understand why they are even present at the trial if the prosecution cannot specify what crime their clients are accused of. The defense insists: if the source of the funds hasn’t been proven, money laundering charges cannot stand.
Family Drama and Legal Uncertainty
The trial involving the Puchol case continues amid fierce criticism from the defense and growing public interest. Despite disagreements over strategy, the family remains united, striving to minimize risk for each member. Whether they will be able to prove their innocence in court remains uncertain. For now, the proceedings are marked by disputes over the legitimacy of the charges and efforts to expose weaknesses in the prosecution’s case.
