A high-profile investigation into possible fraud in the allocation of government contracts, involving former key figures of the PSOE party, has taken a new turn. The Supreme Court’s decision to transfer the case to another court means the process could implicate more participants and lead to unexpected consequences for the country’s political landscape. For Spaniards, this is more than just another scandal—it’s about trust in institutions and transparency in the distribution of public funds.
Case transferred
Spain’s Supreme Court has officially transferred the investigation into alleged irregularities in the awarding of government contracts to the National Court (Audiencia Nacional). The spotlight is on former PSOE organizational secretaries José Luis Ábalos and Santos Cerdán, as well as their former advisor Koldo García. This move comes after Ábalos resigned as a member of parliament, automatically losing his immunity and changing the case’s jurisdiction.
Supreme Court judge Leopoldo Puente, who previously oversaw the investigation, noted that after Ábalos left parliament, the case should be heard by another court. Judge Ismael Moreno of the Audiencia Nacional will now supervise the proceedings. This decision turns a new page in a case that was initially viewed as part of a broader anti-corruption inquiry at the Ministry of Transport.
Investigation broadens
The case transferred to the Audiencia Nacional became independent and gained particular importance as it involves two former party leaders close to Pedro Sánchez. As a result, pressure on PSOE increased and public attention to the details of the investigation has only intensified.
Currently, the Audiencia Nacional is conducting three parallel investigations related to corruption in the Ministry of Transport and the activities of PSOE during the leadership of Ábalos and Serdán. These include potential violations in the procurement of medical masks during the pandemic, suspicions of unrecorded financial transactions within the party, and, finally, alleged manipulations with public contracts in exchange for commissions.
Key figures
The Supreme Court retained only part of the case, related to the procurement of masks, involving the former Minister of Transport, his advisor Koldo García, and ex-commission agent Víctor de Aldama. This part of the investigation has already been completed and is awaiting the scheduling of a court hearing.
At the same time, the new investigation led by Judge Moreno covers a broader group of individuals. In addition to Ábalos, Serdán, García, and Aldama, the case includes eight entrepreneurs who, according to investigators, could have been involved in manipulation of public contracts. Among them are representatives of the companies Levantina Ingeniería y Construcción (LIC), Obras Públicas y Regadíos (OPR), Acciona, and Servinabar. Investigators claim the latter was partially owned by Serdán.
Legal details
On Monday, Judge Puente recalled that, according to the 2014 plenary decision by the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, final jurisdiction over cases against individuals with parliamentary immunity is determined at the time the trial is opened. If, by that point, the person involved loses their immunity status, the case is transferred to another court. In Ábalos’s situation, the mask procurement investigation will remain with the Supreme Court since the decision to refer the case there was made before his resignation. However, the investigation into contract fraud will now be handled entirely by the Audiencia Nacional.
This turn of events could lead to new interrogations, the emergence of additional suspects, and an expanded scope of investigated episodes. For the country’s political elite, this is a clear warning: the judicial system is showing it is ready to pursue even the most complex and sensitive cases to the end.
Background and implications
In recent years, Spain has repeatedly faced high-profile investigations related to corruption within government institutions. Such cases have often led to the resignation of top officials and a review of procedures for allocating public funds. One recalls how, in 2024, a similar investigation in another ministry sparked a wave of public discontent and prompted reforms in public procurement. At that time, attention to transparency and oversight of budget spending increased sharply, and political parties were forced to revise their internal regulations. The new case involving former PSOE leaders may become yet another catalyst for changes in the system of government contract oversight and for strengthening officials’ accountability.
