At the Audiencia Nacional, Leticia de la Hoz, the lawyer who represented Koldo García in the high-profile mask procurement case before Spain’s Supreme Court, denied that the PSOE financed her legal defense or that she offered a bribe to influence testimony. She made the denials while appearing as a defendant in the investigation known as the “caso Leire.” The case examines alleged efforts to obstruct corruption inquiries affecting the PSOE, including claims involving De la Hoz and businesswoman Carmen Pano.
De la Hoz rejected the accusations, maintaining that she neither received payments from the party nor acted on its behalf. Her defense denies offering Pano money to change or retract her testimony. It has also challenged the impartiality of the Guardia Civil’s Unidad Central Operativa (UCO), arguing that investigators were examining conduct allegedly directed against their own institution. The defense described this as an inquiry into “conduct that goes against them.”
Judge Santiago Pedraz summoned De la Hoz after the UCO reported indications that she had participated in up to four meetings where a bribe was allegedly proposed to Pano in exchange for changing her judicial testimony. Pano has said that she delivered €90,000 in cash to the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz. She has attributed the money to Claudio Rivas, whom reporting identifies as the beneficial owner of hydrocarbons company Villafuel and an associate of Víctor de Aldama. Her account links the allegation to wider investigations into hydrocarbons businesses and alleged payments involving former Transport Minister José Luis Ábalos.
Pano has also alleged that De la Hoz offered her between €50,000 and €250,000 to change her account, purportedly to protect Ábalos and his former adviser Koldo García. De la Hoz denies the allegation. The dispute also concerns messages Álvaro Gallego, identified in the proceedings as an associate of Pano, reportedly told the judge he possessed. De la Hoz’s defense says Pano later supplied the messages in an edited form resembling versions previously published by media outlets. It criticizes investigators for including them without adequately addressing possible manipulation. These are defense claims, not a judicial finding that the messages were fabricated.
De la Hoz provided documentation to the court in support of her account. She said Pano and Gallego contacted her office in February 2025 to request mediation in the sale of several hydrocarbon companies. Her firm declined to get involved after discovering that one of the companies was implicated in VAT fraud. De la Hoz further alleged that Pano and Gallego, not her, demanded a €10,000 advance commission for a potential sale.
Pano’s business history also features in a separate UCO inquiry into alleged large-scale VAT fraud involving hydrocarbons. Investigators examined three companies she administered. These were Sociedad Comercio Justo y Solidario S. XXI SL, Ornus Import SL and Nerium Logistia SL. They reportedly identified more than 120 cash withdrawals totaling €2.25 million between 2020 and 2021. Pano was not processed in that case. In January 2026, while under investigation in the Villafuel proceedings, she again attributed the alleged €90,000 delivery to Rivas in a statement before Pedraz.
Pedraz has also ordered the PSOE to provide information about lawyers and professional firms hired by its national and territorial organizations between 2021 and 2025. The court requested the firms’ identities and information on the work commissioned and payments made. The Consejo General del Poder Judicial said the court set a maximum 15-day deadline and directed the party to comply without further delay. The PSOE invoked professional secrecy and sought additional time. The request aims to establish whether contractual or financial links existed between party structures and people connected with the investigation.
The case has drawn attention because it overlaps with previous legal battles involving PSOE-linked figures. The legal and political fallout echoes earlier courtroom tensions, including the public scrutiny De la Hoz faced after her client’s sentencing in the mask procurement scandal. That episode was covered in coverage of the Supreme Court scene involving Koldo García’s lawyer.
The proceedings remain active, with Pedraz examining both Pano’s account of the alleged cash delivery and the claimed effort to influence her testimony. Claudio Rivas’s planned testimony was postponed until 3 December. His defense is expected to submit four boxes containing about 3,000 pages and challenge Pano’s account, including by arguing that she, rather than Rivas, acquired a property connected to Ábalos. The competing accounts and the court’s requests for party records have kept attention on the financial links and business dealings at the center of the case, as well as the evidence underpinning the investigation.
