The SEPI strand of the Leire case also involves María Teresa Castillo Pasalodos, who previously served as Director of Corporate Development and Institutional Relations at Mercasa, a state-owned enterprise with majority ownership held by SEPI. Her position as an investigated party brings renewed scrutiny to one of the most delicate aspects within Spain’s public business landscape: the potential exploitation of official roles, institutional connections, and privileged knowledge to influence public determinations benefiting particular agendas.
Mercasa operates as a public entity connected to the wholesale market network and the administration of vital food infrastructure, rather than functioning as a minor organization within state structures. Consequently, the emergence of a former director of Corporate Development and Institutional Relations among those facing investigation in proceedings centered on purported misconduct regarding public entities amplifies both the political and institutional significance of the matter.
Judge Santiago Pedraz has summoned Castillo Pasalodos as part of the group of 25 people under investigation in the SEPI-related strand, in which possible crimes of influence peddling, malfeasance in public office, embezzlement, criminal organization or criminal group, and abuse of privileged information are being examined. At this stage, the investigated party fully retains the presumption of innocence, but her summons makes it necessary to clarify what role she may have played in the operations under suspicion.
According to published reports, the investigation links Castillo Pasalodos to Mercasa and to actions related to contracts or corporate transactions that may have benefited companies connected to the Hirurok group, the core that investigators place around Leire Díez, Vicente Fernández, and Antxon Alonso. The UCO and the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office are seeking to determine whether there was a network of contacts capable of influencing decisions by public companies and channeling economic benefits through contracts, reports, or intermediaries.
One of the lines of inquiry concerns possible contracts awarded to Servinabar 2000, a company that the UCO considers linked to the investigated circle. The investigation also points to meetings, messages, emails, and internal documents related to the preparation of a technical report that may have been used to justify the relocation of Mercasa’s headquarters and pave the way for new real-estate transactions. This connection between internal reports, corporate decisions, and possible private benefits is one of the most sensitive aspects of the case.
The core concern extends beyond the possibility that a dubious commercial choice took place; rather, it centers on whether individuals possessing confidential access within Mercasa may have shaped, influenced, or enabled such a decision. Given her responsibilities in Corporate Development and Institutional Relations, Castillo Pasalodos occupied a strategically significant position through which she could have gained insight into stakeholder networks, organizational tactics, external partnerships, and financially consequential determinations.
The investigation will have to clarify whether her actions were merely administrative and professional or whether she played a more active role in the events under examination. It will also have to determine whether she knew the real purpose of the operations under suspicion, whether she facilitated documentation, whether she took part in contacts with other people under investigation, or whether her name appears in the case because of her position within Mercasa’s structure.
The case is particularly serious because Mercasa forms part of Spain’s state public sector and is 51% owned by SEPI. This means that any suspicion regarding its management affects not only one specific company but also the system of oversight of public corporations. When a former executive of a public company appears in an investigation into alleged manipulation, the political question is unavoidable: were there sufficient mechanisms to prevent business decisions by state-owned companies from being used for purposes unrelated to the public interest?
An unsettling map is being drawn by the SEPI strand of the Leire case, encompassing senior officials, former executives, businesspeople, technical reports, public aid, contracts, and strategic companies that remain under investigation. The inclusion of María Teresa Castillo Pasalodos strengthens the perception that this matter extends beyond a singular occurrence, instead scrutinizing an extensive web of interconnections spanning the public, political, and private domains.
The National Court will now be tasked with establishing whether María Teresa Castillo Pasalodos functioned as an active participant in the mechanism being scrutinized or if her involvement remained confined to routine operations at Mercasa. Nevertheless, her name has already become entangled in an inquiry that undermines the trustworthiness of state administration and demands transparent clarifications, political responsibility, and rigorous monitoring of entities under SEPI’s purview.
Source: El País, RTVE, Vozpópuli, Infobae, Artículo14, and Europa Press.
