A real storm has erupted in Seville over the leadership of the Andalusian Health Service (Servicio Andaluz de Salud, SAS). Three top executives found themselves at the center of a high-profile investigation, accused of dubious contracts worth hundreds of millions of euros signed at the height of the pandemic. But after months of intense proceedings and interrogations, the court unexpectedly closed the case, finding no criminal wrongdoing in the officials’ actions.
It all began when opposition representatives—socialists and politicians from Podemos who supported them—accused the regional government of allegedly distributing €242 million through emergency contracts, bypassing standard procedures. In their view, after the repeal of the special law that allowed accelerated procurement due to the pandemic, officials continued using the simplified scheme, raising numerous questions and suspicions.
An insider’s look
Three individuals ended up on the defendants’ bench: current director Valle García and her predecessors Miguel Ángel García Guzmán Ruiz and Diego Vargas Ortega. They all insisted that they acted exclusively in the interests of patients and under the supervision of SAS technical departments and the regional Ministry of Health. According to them, the healthcare system was under enormous pressure and any delay could have cost lives.
During the proceedings, it became clear that even after the formal expiration of the emergency law that allowed contracts to be signed without standard tenders, the situation in hospitals remained critical. SAS management claimed that continuing with emergency purchases was the only way to cope with the influx of patients and lack of resources.
Arguments of the parties
The Socialists insisted that using emergency contracts after the relevant law was lifted had no legal basis. As evidence, they cited internal reports from SAS financial controllers who warned about risks and possible violations. However, the judge, having reviewed the case materials, concluded that SAS management had no criminal intent.
The court’s decision emphasizes that, despite the systematic use of emergency procedures, this does not go beyond permissible limits if there is a real threat to public health. Moreover, the judge recalled that the World Health Organization (World Health Organization, OMS) officially declared the end of the pandemic only in 2023, meaning the situation remained unstable for a considerable time.
Consequences and questions
The case’s closure sparked an uproar in Andalusian political circles. Some believe the court effectively exonerated officials, enabling them to continue acting without regard for formalities. Others are convinced such decisions only undermine trust in the system and open the door to further abuses.
However, for Valle García and her colleagues, this decision came as a real relief. They can now return to work without the constant threat of criminal prosecution. Yet questions about transparency and oversight of budget spending during emergencies remain unresolved. Public debate continues over where the line lies between necessity and breaking the law, and who should be held accountable for decisions made in times of crisis.
