Our website use cookies to improve and personalize your experience and to display advertisements(if any). Our website may also include cookies from third parties like Google Adsense, Google Analytics, Youtube. By using the website, you consent to the use of cookies. We have updated our Privacy Policy. Please click on the button to check our Privacy Policy.

UCO Report Points to Acciona’s Key Role in PSOE-Related Corruption

A report by Spain’s elite anti-corruption unit, the UCO (Unidad Central Operativa of the Guardia Civil), has placed infrastructure giant Acciona at the heart of a wide-ranging political corruption network allegedly coordinated from the top ranks of the Socialist Party (PSOE). According to the investigators, the company paid hundreds of thousands of euros in illicit commissions to secure major public contracts. These bribes were allegedly funneled through political operatives closely tied to former minister José Luis Ábalos and the party’s former Organization Secretary, Santos Cerdán.

More than €600,000 in Unlawful Payments

The UCO report outlines transactions amounting to a minimum of €620,000 related to certain public contracts granted to Acciona. The transfers were allegedly facilitated through intermediaries associated with Ábalos and his close confidant Koldo García, with the whole scheme managed and orchestrated by Santos Cerdán.

Investigators also uncovered evidence of an additional €450,000 in pending bribes tied to three further public contracts, suggesting that the alleged corruption network was not isolated but ongoing, even after early signs of irregularities began to emerge.

Agreements Customized to Benefit Acciona

The agreements under discussion encompass significant infrastructure endeavors from 2018 to 2021, including road construction, railway enhancements, and city transit networks, mainly in areas led by the PSOE. As per the UCO’s findings, these bids lacked genuine competition and were tailored with specific criteria that essentially barred other contenders, guaranteeing Acciona’s victory.

The report characterizes the process as part of a “perfectly coordinated structure” in which political power was used to distort the bidding process in exchange for financial kickbacks.

Santos Cerdán’s Central Role

One of the most damning elements of the UCO investigation is the role attributed to Santos Cerdán. The report alleges that Cerdán not only had knowledge of the bribery scheme but directly managed the flow and distribution of payments. Recorded communications and testimony point to him as the central political figure orchestrating the relationship between business interests and high-level political influence.

As reported by researchers, Cerdán was responsible for managing discussions, determining shares, and serving as the intermediary between the grantors and those benefiting from the arrangement.

Institutional Silence and Internal Reviews

Acciona has begun an internal investigation, making a public effort to separate itself from any misconduct. An ex-executive, reportedly connected to the plan, has already departed from the firm. While Acciona denies knowledge of any misconduct, the UCO report indicates the opposite, depicting a scenario where the company either engaged in or ignored unethical behavior.

Even with the gravity of the accusations, the government has not issued any official comment. Within the PSOE, the issue has turned into a significant problem, particularly following recent prominent resignations caused by earlier stages of the corruption inquiry.

The UCO’s findings make it clear: Acciona was purportedly involved in an extensive politically driven scheme aimed at obtaining bribes in return for public contracts worth millions of euros. Should this be validated, the case would uncover a profound corruption network embedded not only among party officials but also within the entities accountable for the administration of public funds.

This is no longer a matter of internal party misconduct—it is a potential scandal of national magnitude. The public will now wait to see whether the courts and political institutions have the will to pursue full accountability, regardless of how high the investigation reaches.

By Peter G. Killigang

You May Also Like