The judge requests information from twelve banks to trace the PSOE's payments linked to the Leire case
Santiago Pedraz claims data on 81 bank accounts: 6 are of the socialists, 62 are of Ismael Oliver and his law firm, and 11 are linked to Gaspar Zarrías
MadridThe judge is making a move to scrutinize the alleged payments made by the PSOE to Leire Díez as part of alleged maneuvers instigated to destabilize and obstruct judicial cases involving Pedro Sánchez's circle. Santiago Pedraz wants to delve deeper into the suspicion that a series of invoices paid by the party were used to covertly fund the activities of the so-called plumber of the PSOE. The magistrate of the Audiencia Nacional has accepted the request from the Guardia Civil – backed by the Anticorruption Prosecutor's Office – and has requested information from twelve banks regarding the movements and balances of 81 accounts related to the case. Six of them belong to the PSOE. Additionally, there are 62 accounts belonging to Ismael Oliver and his law firm, eleven linked to Gaspar Zarrías, who was vice-president of the Regional Government of Andalusia, and one belonging to Jacobo Teijelo, who is one of Santos Cerdán's lawyers.
“It cannot be ruled out that cross-referencing between the different accounts may shed light on those payments that are suspected to have been made but have not yet been proven,” argues the judge, adopting the words of the two prosecutors. Initially, Santiago Pedraz halted the Central Operative Unit (UCO) and urged it to specify the “concrete” accounts into which Leire Díez allegedly received money for specific tracking. However, the UCO justified that it was necessary to “avoid premature limitation,” and the magistrate ultimately agreed.
In a document accessed by ARA, the Anticorruption Prosecutor's Office explains its thesis: “To structure these payments without revealing the sender, companies belonging to the investigated individuals would have been used with the presumed agreement of the PSOE manager,” it states. Although initially also opposing the UCO's requests, it now recognizes that it is appropriate given the existence of an “intricate economic support system” and after the discovery of “superposition and concealment of certain payments.” Lawyer Ismael Oliver and Ana María Fuentes – the PSOE manager – will have to testify as investigated parties on Wednesday, September 9.
What payments were they?
The judge is scrutinizing the bank accounts of three individuals who, according to the Prosecutor's Office, were part of the "impetus" and "intellectual and financial support" for Leire Díez, along with Santos Cerdán, who at the time was the number three in the PSOE. Firstly, between May and September 2024, Leire Díez received a remuneration of 4,000 euros from Zaño Consultora, Gaspar Zarrías's company. The total cost of her hiring was 7,505 euros, which is the exact amount the PSOE paid to the company. This is why the suspicion is that it served as a shell company. On the other hand, Gaspar Zarrías's defense claims that he is involved in the case "solely for having hired" Leire Díez.
Subsequently, the PSOE allegedly activated a new operation to channel funds to Leire Díez through consulting invoices to two lawyers, who are now under investigation: Ismael Oliver and Jacobo Teijelo. First, Leire Díez received 27,225 euros from Ismael Oliver's firm: "The flow of money is perfectly traced," says the Prosecutor's Office. Later, Jacobo Teijelo received 125,000 euros from the PSOE which – according to the public ministry – were intended to pay him and could have been the "vehicle" to remunerate Leire Díez, even though "the payments" from him to her "have not been proven." When he testified, he explained that the PSOE hired him to study what could happen with cases involving the party's circle.
A "prospective, absurd, and unfounded" request
There is an immediate first reaction to this request. In a document to which the ARA has had access, Gaspar Zarrías reproaches the judge for having given the green light to a “prospective, absurd and unfounded” diligence that goes beyond what would be necessary for him to extend the scrutiny to accounts that “are not related” to the facts: “It simply seeks to look at everything to see if he finds something,” he laments.