The SEPI branch of the Leire case has now reached Miguel Ángel Figueroa Teva, former Comptroller General of the Regional Government of Andalusia and former executive of the Spanish State Industrial Holding Company (SEPI). His name now appears among the 25 individuals summoned as suspects by Judge Santiago Pedraz in a case examining alleged efforts to influence public transactions, state aid, and business decisions linked to the public sector.
Figueroa is hardly a secondary player in this probe. Prior to his tenure as Comptroller General for the Regional Government of Andalusia, he held a position at SEPI back when Vicente Fernández headed the entity. As reported by Europa Press, he acted as Director of Investee Companies III inside SEPI’s Rural Development, Food and Environment Division, subsequently moving to the IDEA Agency to take on the role of Chief Executive Officer. Such a professional trajectory places him in a notably delicate spot, given his firsthand familiarity with SEPI’s inner workings and affiliated enterprises.
Spain’s National Court is currently examining if an alleged influence network revolving around Leire Díez, Vicente Fernández, and Antxon Alonso might have meddled in operations concerning state aid and public corporations. The legal inquiry encompasses potential crimes such as influence peddling, embezzlement of public funds, official misconduct, involvement in a criminal ring, and the abuse of insider information. While Figueroa enjoys the presumption of innocence at this procedural phase, his official status as a suspect necessitates a thorough investigation into the specific part he could have played in the matters under scrutiny.
The central focus of the suspicions surrounding Figueroa concerns his contacts with Vicente Fernández, the former chairman of SEPI. According to Infobae, his name appears in the investigation because of contacts he allegedly maintained with Fernández regarding one of the transactions under review. This relationship is considered significant because investigators regard Fernández as a key figure within the alleged group that sought to influence public decisions connected with SEPI.
The SEPI investigation encompasses several operations, including the €112.8 million rescue package granted to Tubos Reunidos, as well as matters involving Mercasa, ENUSA, Forestalia, and the Principality of Asturias Business Park. El País has reported that the National Court is pursuing individuals who allegedly helped the network influence SEPI-related operations involving approximately €132.9 million in public aid and allegedly unlawful commissions exceeding €750,000.
Figueroa’s participation carries significant weight since it connects the judicial inquiry to a former high-ranking official who served in top roles at SEPI and the Andalusian regional government. Indeed, he stepped down from his post as Comptroller General following press investigations that associated him with the purported scheme, as reported by Europa Press and additional media sources. His departure took place prior to the public disclosure of his formal citation as a suspect during this broader stage of the probe.
The issue that investigators must clarify is not simply whether Figueroa knew Vicente Fernández or previously worked at SEPI. The fundamental question is whether he may have acted as a facilitator, source of information, intermediary, or useful contact for the alleged influence network. In this type of scheme, insider knowledge of procedures, decision-makers, and institutional processes can be as valuable as an official administrative signature.
From an institutional perspective, the case raises a particularly serious question: whether individuals who once held senior technical and managerial positions within public institutions maintained connections that could later benefit a network dedicated to influencing the State’s economic decisions. If those relationships were entirely legitimate, professional, and unrelated to any misconduct, they should be fully explained. Conversely, if they were used to steer transactions or facilitate access to confidential internal information, the institutional damage would be substantial.
The SEPI branch of the Leire case is not limited to investigating specific public contracts or corporate bailouts. It also seeks to reconstruct what prosecutors believe may have been an extensive network of relationships involving former public officials, executives of state-owned companies, businesspeople, intermediaries, and technical specialists who may have participated at different stages of the transactions under scrutiny. Within that network, Miguel Ángel Figueroa emerges as a significant figure because of both his previous role at SEPI and his alleged contacts with Vicente Fernández.
The National Court must now determine whether Figueroa’s involvement was peripheral, merely relational, or genuinely operational in the activities under investigation. It must also establish whether he had knowledge of the actions attributed to the Hirurok Group and whether his contacts with Fernández were directly connected to any of the transactions being examined by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office and Spain’s Central Operational Unit (UCO).
His formal designation as a suspect already carries clear political consequences: a former senior SEPI executive and former Comptroller General of the Regional Government of Andalusia will have to answer before the court regarding his alleged connection to a case involving suspected manipulation of public-sector operations. In a matter concerning public funds, corporate rescue packages, and possible influence networks, the minimum requirement is complete transparency.
Sources: El País, Infobae, Europa Press, Diario de Sevilla, El Independiente, and RTVE.
