Court Investigates Zapatero’s Ties to 'Boutique Financiera' and Plus Ultra Case. A judge at the Audiencia Nacional is examining Zapatero’s role in an alleged influence scheme. The focus is on the bailout of Plus Ultra and a network of companies involving individuals close to the former president.
An investigation is unfolding in Spain, centering on former Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. National Court Judge José Luis Calama suspects that the ex-head of government may have led a stable structure for influence peddling, operating through a close circle of trusted associates. According to the investigation, the main goal of this group was to obtain economic benefits by lobbying for third-party interests, primarily those of the Venezuelan airline Plus Ultra.
A key episode was the support for Plus Ultra in the amount of 53 million euros from a state fund, approved by the government of Pedro Sánchez in March 2021. Investigators believe that the group's actions were not about abstract influence, but aimed at a specific decision—the allocation of aid to the airline. Case materials include meetings, contacts, and access to confidential information, which, according to the judge, indicate targeted pressure on the responsible authorities.
The top of the alleged scheme, referred to by its members as a 'boutique financiera,' includes Zapatero and two businessmen—Julio Martínez Martínez and Manuel Aaron Fajardo. Martínez Martínez, owner of Análisis Relevante and Idella Consulenza Strategica, is seen as the key intermediary and organizer of financial flows. According to the investigation, payments, including more than 700,000 euros to Zapatero and his daughters, were routed through his companies. Particular attention is being paid to a contract between Idella Consulenza and Plus Ultra, which provided for a 1% commission from the state aid sum that is believed to have been received via a company in Dubai.
Manuel Fajardo, referred to in the materials as 'Zapatero's man in Venezuela', also appears as a direct intermediary between clients and the Spanish side of the scheme. Correspondence between the leadership of Plus Ultra notes that it was through Fajardo that contact with Zapatero was established, which, according to investigators, played a role in successfully securing support.
In the third tier of the structure, Cristóbal Cano — a trusted associate of Martínez Martínez, who is linked to dozens of companies — and Gertrudis Alcázar, Zapatero's secretary, are singled out. They were responsible for the daily administration and handling of documents related to the group's activities. In particular, Cano forwarded contracts related to payments from Plus Ultra, while Alcázar coordinated the flow of documents and participated in creating companies abroad.
Separately, the case mentions the company Whathefav, owned by Zapatero's daughters, Alba and Laura. Investigators believe this firm was used to receive and redistribute funds from clients and affiliated entities. The contract between Whathefav and Análisis Relevante was for marketing services; however, the judge notes the general nature of the invoices and their link to the main financial flows.
Among the companies through which, according to the investigation, the funds passed, are Softgestor, Inteligencia Prospectiva, the Chinese construction company Aldesa, Caletón Consultores, and Summer Wind. The latter received almost 4 million euros from Plus Ultra, which, according to the court, may have been a way to conceal the origin of some of the funds. In total, Análisis Relevante transferred almost half a million euros to Zapatero and around 240 thousand euros to the subsidiary Whathefav. In addition, the think tank Gate Center and its managing group, Thinking Heads, also transferred significant sums. However, representatives of Thinking Heads stated that all payments were for actual services rendered, as was the case with other former heads of state.
The context of the case highlights just how complex the schemes of interaction between politicians, business, and government agencies in Spain can be. Issues of transparency and oversight over the distribution of public funds remain relevant, especially amid other high-profile investigations involving influence and lobbying. For instance, the country previously discussed cases of pressure on non-profit organizations like Cáritas Valencia, which continued to work with migrants despite criticism from the far right — more about this can be found in the article about the situation surrounding support for migrants in Valencia.
For reference: The Audiencia Nacional is one of Spain's key courts, handling cases of corruption, economic crimes, and abuse of power. Plus Ultra is an airline with Venezuelan capital that received government support during the pandemic. In recent years, Spain has seen increased attention to transparency in the allocation of budget funds and the fight against corruption at all levels.
