Rafael Méndez: "Politicians do not confront high-ranking state officials because they would have problems"

Rafael Méndez (Múrcian, 1975) is a journalist who has focused on what has gone unnoticed: the spheres of high-ranking state officials. After publishing several investigative articles on the functioning of this group at the top of Spanish power, he has written a book, The Masters of the State (Destino, 2026), to explain everything surrounding this elite group. Méndez has worked at El País, El Confidencial, Salvados and collaborates with Eldiario.es.The title of the book is already suggestive: the masters of the State. We should all be the masters... but isn't that the case?

— We are all owners, but there is a state within the state: senior officials command a lot, they are the structure; politicians come and go and do not confront them because they would have problems. Better to cooperate with them and have a good relationship. That is why a system has been dragged along in which the lawyers of the Courts, of the Council of State, or the state lawyers have been allowed to have compatibility with private jobs. Or that they can leave on leave of absence to a company and the next day litigate against the administration on the same issue they had been handling. It is a system inherited from the Transition.

Could I make a prototype of these high-level officials?

— They are very smart and well-prepared people. Normally, they are of conservative tradition, with compound surnames and who end up being family. They pass a very tough competitive examination. It is difficult to get people in, and that is good because when a minister arrives, they cannot change the senior civil servants. This way there is a counter-power, but this power they have must also be able to be scrutinized. We think that elites are serious, but one must be on top of them even if they have passed an exam, as this does not mean that they are not still human or that they do not like money.

Provide an example of cases where situations of lack of control over this body have occurred.

— One of the key issues that has not been addressed is the compatibility system. For example, by tradition, the lawyers of the Courts usually ask to have their private office and the Congress's board grants it to them as a mere formality. They have restrictions such as that this cannot affect their schedule or they cannot act against the administration itself, but this does not prevent them from working for local administrations or autonomous communities. In reality, no one controls it. There are people within the civil service body who do not see it well, but corporatism prevails and they do not report it publicly.

What cases have you encountered? 

— To me, the most outrageous is that of Joaquín José Abajo Quintana, who was secretary of the board of directors of Afinsa, where he had to ensure that everything the company did was legal, and at the same time a practicing state attorney before the High Court of Justice of Madrid, so that one of the things he had to do was defend the Tax Agency. Afinsa turned out to be a macro-scam, and during the trial, company papers even emerged bearing the insignia of the State Advocacy [during the trial Quintana argued that the papers had been mistakenly mixed up]. Working for Afinsa and for the State at the same time was not illegal because he had compatibility [but he ended up sentenced to prison as a necessary cooperator].

The book also mentions another figure, that of permanent councillors in the Council of State.

— Yes, this one is very interesting, because they end up being lifetime positions. There is a saying that they "never get sick and rarely die", because they have enormous longevity. They place veterans from both major parties, from the judiciary... The existence of this figure can be defended, but it seems to me that there has not been enough public debate about it. The salary is very good, they don't stop you on the street, the job is not very stressful... Even during the Zapatero government, there were two councilors who were very old, who had difficulty exercising their position, and they had to create a pension, which they introduced in an article of the budgets, so that they would retire. They were the last positions that survived from Franco's era, and this was during the midst of austerity measures.

What reforms are needed?

— To begin with, this issue must be discussed and, afterwards, one of the possible reforms could be to limit the time officials are on leave of absence. Currently, almost 40% are on leave of absence. There are state lawyers who are sometimes litigating on behalf of sovereign funds from Gulf countries or sovereign German companies... No company would tolerate someone on leave of absence acting against them. And regarding compatibilities, I would be in favour of controlling them strictly or even eliminating them. Sometimes, eyes are turned a blind eye because they don't want them to leave the corps [in private companies they earn more money].

Why are companies so interested in having these figures?

— State lawyers are highly valued by companies because they have extensive theoretical knowledge through competitive examinations, but at the same time, they truly understand the administration. For example, they are of interest to electricity companies because a large part of regulation ends up in court, there are many millions at stake, and state lawyers know how the law was made because they work alongside politicians. Furthermore, they also have contacts, they know who in the ministry did what and who to call [...].

In the book he is critical of journalism. He believes we are too dependent on the agenda that is put before us.

— Yes, I think there is consensus on this. For example, when Pedro Sánchez comes out on a Monday in October and says he is against the time change, the press talks about it for I don't know how many days, but next year the time will change again. I don't see the point in dedicating so much effort to it.

It also talks about his departure from El País, which I understand was a very difficult decision.

— I published with a colleague a report from the State Attorney's Office that allowed Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría to deal with Telefónica matters when her husband worked there. She was a state lawyer, her husband too, and the lawyer who made the report was a promotion colleague of her husband. We published it, but at that time Prisa was very weak economically and it all ended up leading to a conflict with the then director Antonio Caño. I decided that I could not stay in a place where the director thought I was a bad professional. There was the ERO open and I went to look for work outside, but I have many friends at El País and I think it's a great newspaper. Afterwards I was at El Confidencial and there I published with a lot of freedom.