Zapatero Surprised by UDEF Findings in Plus Ultra Case, Denies Involvement. Spain’s former prime minister is at the center of an investigation into state aid for Plus Ultra. Zapatero rejects allegations of exerting pressure and asserts his complete non-involvement. The case involves large sums and business connections.
Former Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero has found himself at the center of a high-profile investigation into the allocation of 53 million euros in state aid to the airline Plus Ultra. According to investigators, National Court judge José Luis Calama casts Zapatero as a key figure in the alleged influence scheme. However, the ex-prime minister categorically denies any accusations of pressuring authorities or lobbying on behalf of the company.
Zapatero's position was presented by Luis Arroyo, journalist and president of the Madrid Ateneo, who is authorized to comment on the situation. According to him, the former prime minister is surprised by the contents of the UDEF report (Economic and Tax Crime Unit), which attributes to him the leadership of a supposed network of influence. Arroyo emphasizes that Zapatero did not take part in any negotiations to save Plus Ultra and did not exert pressure on officials. He also distances himself from the affairs of his friend and businessman Julio Martínez, stating that he bears no responsibility for his business operations.
The case materials include phone conversations and meetings between Plus Ultra management and representatives of the so-called 'Zapatero group.' In particular, UDEF refers to a conversation by the airline’s vice president, Julio Martínez Solá, in which he mentions contacts with 'Zapatero and the Chinese.' However, as Arroyo notes, all these episodes do not confirm the former prime minister’s involvement in the decision-making on allocating funds.
The investigation is also examining financial operations linked to Julio Martinez Martinez, a friend of Zapatero. €300,000 in cash was found at his home, and more than half a million euros were discovered in accounts held by an offshore company in the Virgin Islands. These findings could lead to separate tax proceedings, but according to Arroyo, Zapatero has no connection to these funds and does not control Martinez's business.
As part of the investigation, Judge Calama ordered a search of the marketing agency Whathefav, run by Zapatero's daughters. Investigators suspect the company may have been involved in preparing reports related to payments to the former prime minister. Arroyo explains that the daughters do help their father organize his trips and manage his social media, but all operations are transparent and legal. Zapatero himself prefers to pay income tax rather than use corporate schemes.
The UDEF report also mentions the mortgage on Zapatero's house, which he plans to pay off in January 2025 after selling the property. Arroyo points out that this matter is taken out of context in the investigation materials: only the mortgage cancellation is mentioned, while the house sale itself is not reflected.
So far, Zapatero has refrained from making public statements, preparing his defense for the hearing in the National Court on June 2. His representative emphasizes that the former prime minister considers the accusations unfounded and intends to present his position in detail in court. In Spain, cases involving state support for companies during the pandemic have repeatedly come under close scrutiny, as have questions about the transparency of budget fund allocation. In this context, it is worth noting that important events are also taking place in other branches of government — for example, the Vatican recently outlined new priorities for the Church, as was reported in the article about Pope Leon XIV’s agenda for Pentecost.
For reference: UDEF is a specialized unit of the Spanish police dealing with economic crime investigations. The National Court is the highest Spanish court for particularly complex cases. Plus Ultra is an airline that received state support during the pandemic. Issues of transparency and legality regarding such decisions remain at the center of public attention.
