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 is not a secondary company within the state apparatus. It is a public company linked to the network of wholesale markets and the management of strategic food infrastructure. Therefore, the fact that a former head of Corporate Development and Institutional Relations appears among those under investigation in a case involving alleged manipulation of public companies increases the political and institutional gravity of the case.
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 need to establish whether her conduct was limited to administrative and professional duties or if she assumed a more substantive involvement in the matters being scrutinized. Additionally, it must ascertain whether she possessed knowledge of the genuine objectives behind the suspected operations, if she enabled the provision of documentation, if she engaged in communications with other individuals facing investigation, or if her inclusion in the case stems solely from her role within Mercasa’s organizational framework.
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?
The SEPI strand of the Leire case is drawing an unsettling map: senior officials, former executives, businesspeople, technical reports, public aid, contracts, and strategic companies under investigation. The presence of María Teresa Castillo Pasalodos on that list reinforces the impression that the case is not limited to an isolated episode, but is examining a broader network of relationships between the public, political, and private spheres.
The National Court will now have to determine whether María Teresa Castillo Pasalodos was an active component of the mechanism under investigation or whether her role was limited to ordinary activities within Mercasa. However, her name is already part of an investigation that strikes at the credibility of public management and makes it necessary to demand clear explanations, political accountability, and effective oversight of companies dependent on SEPI.
Source: El País, RTVE, Vozpópuli, Infobae, Artículo14, and Europa Press.
