The Guardia Civil operation, identified as “Trajano 23 Sorela,” is investigating an alleged money-laundering network active in Cádiz and Sevilla provinces. The inquiry has also brought renewed scrutiny to more than €1 million in public sponsorships connected to football-beach events. Separate reporting by Cádiz Directo says Javier Botella filed a request with the Fiscalía, asking prosecutors to examine whether objective links exist between the contracts and the Guardia Civil case. The cited contracts have not been established as part of that investigation. Pascual Llopis, a prominent hospitality entrepreneur in El Puerto de Santa María, is among 11 people detained on suspicion of laundering drug-trafficking proceeds and committing corruption-related offences. The inquiry has raised questions about public spending and possible links to local officials.
Authorities carried out coordinated raids on Wednesday, targeting Llopis’s businesses and properties in Cádiz and Sevilla provinces, as well as offices at the Diputación de Cádiz. The operation, led by the EDOA and the Economic Crimes Unit of the Sevilla Command, resulted in the seizure of €1.2 million in cash from Llopis’s establishments. That sum was part of the €1.8 million recovered during the searches. No drugs were found. Investigators are assessing seized assets, including vehicles, as they examine suspected proceeds of crime.
The contracts under scrutiny include two Diputación de Cádiz sponsorships for the Euro Beach Soccer League in 2025 and 2026, worth a combined €605,000 including VAT, information from Cádiz Directo. The same report puts contributions from the Andalucía public company Turismo y Deporte de Andalucía at a further €484,000 for those editions, bringing the two public funding streams to €1.089 million. It also records a separate €150,000 Diputación award to the Federación Andaluza de Fútbol for championships in Rota and Chipiona. The sponsorship figures are being examined in a prosecutorial filing. They remain distinct from the Guardia Civil investigation unless investigators establish a connection.
The contracts at the center of the case were awarded without public tender between May 2024 and April 2026, benefiting Llopis’s companies Bahía Luz Restauración, S.L. and Luna Bahía, S.L. Both firms are among seven businesses registered under Llopis’s name. He has worked in the local hospitality sector since the 1990s. Investigators are examining whether illicit funds fueled his recent financial resurgence and whether he knew of their alleged criminal origin.
Judicial reporting describes a wider business structure spanning hospitality, nightlife, real estate, festivals and musical events. It names Sevillian businessman Mario García Lobato as an alleged basic figure alongside Llopis, and also refers to hospitality entrepreneurs Miguel Ángel Veiga and Carlos Veiga. According to Diario de Cádiz, the investigating judge’s order describes García Lobato as operating “in the shadows” of Llopis’s companies and refers to arrangements to pay artists in cash. The judicial material also reportedly refers to a WhatsApp* (принадлежит Metа, которая признана экстремистской организацией и запрещена в РФ) group discussing “amounts of money” to obtain “licenses, venues and contracts” involving staff at the Diputación de Cádiz and the Junta de Andalucía. These remain allegations in the investigation, not findings of guilt.
Three of the 11 detainees have been released after appearing before the El Puerto de Santa María court; the remaining eight were expected to appear soon. The investigation also involves Llopis’s family members and other hospitality entrepreneurs. Judicial reporting describes alleged offences including bribery, abuse of office, misuse of public funds, disclosure of secrets, use of privileged information and influence peddling.
The inquiry has put pressure on Mayor Germán Beardo, who serves as vice president of the Diputación de Cádiz. Beardo denies involvement. On Thursday, the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Andalucía said he was not officially under investigation in the Guardia Civil case. Cádiz Directo likewise reported that he was not identified as an investigated person in that case at the time of publication. The filing concerning the sponsorships also addresses a trip by Beardo, but asks prosecutors to examine possible objective connections rather than claiming the contracts form part of the criminal investigation.
Judicial and police sources anticipate further arrests as the inquiry continues. Investigators are examining sponsorship documents seized from the Diputación’s strategic planning and tourism departments. The allegations could implicate public employees or political figures, depending on what the evidence establishes. Separate prosecutorial scrutiny of the public contracts adds a public-spending oversight dimension to the criminal investigation.
The case has drawn attention to how criminal networks may use legitimate businesses and public-facing events to conceal the origin and movement of suspected drug proceeds. In a related development, Spain’s anti-drug authorities have recently urged law enforcement to document violent incidents involving narcolanchas in detail, with the aim of strengthening legal action against organized crime. For more on developing anti-narcotics strategies in Spain, see this recent report on new prosecutorial guidance.
El Puerto de Santa María, with nearly 90,000 residents, has seen its local festivities and public image affected by the scandal. At the 2024 Three Kings parade, Llopis played a leading role as Melchor and distributed festival tickets and food vouchers, an episode now viewed against the backdrop of the ongoing criminal investigation. The case’s outcome could affect public oversight and the management of funds in Cádiz and beyond.
Andalusia’s tourism and hospitality sectors operate alongside major drug-smuggling routes, making the movement of money through legitimate businesses a basic focus of the investigation. The case raises two distinct questions: whether the alleged corporate network was used to launder drug proceeds, and whether any objective connection exists between that inquiry and public sponsorship contracts. Both remain under examination as the proceedings develop.
