Julio Martínez Sola is the president and founder of Plus Ultra Líneas Aéreas. The company itself presents him as one of the promoters of the Spanish airline and maintains his position at the head of the group.
His career is linked to the aviation sector and, in recent years, he has represented Plus Ultra in institutional relations, labor agreements, and expansion plans, especially towards Latin America.
The name of Martínez Sola has gained relevance due to the so-called Plus Ultra case, the investigation opened in the Audiencia Nacional about the actions taken around the public rescue of 53 million euros granted to the company during the pandemic.
The case is led by Judge José Luis Calama and seeks to determine whether the aid was granted in accordance with the established requirements or if political and financial contacts were activated to favor the airline.
Why the rescue of Plus Ultra is being investigated
Plus Ultra received two public loans from the solvency fund managed by SEPI for a total amount of 53 million euros. The decision sparked a strong political controversy from the beginning due to the size of the company and its consideration as a strategic enterprise.
The current investigation goes beyond that initial debate. The court is trying to clarify whether influences were used to facilitate the rescue and whether certain individuals may have received payments or commissions for carrying out actions before public officials.
Martínez Sola appears in the case as president of the beneficiary company, participating in internal conversations and being a direct contact of some of the individuals under investigation.
Alongside him are other officials of the airline, businessmen linked to the examined actions, and the former president of the Government José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. None have been convicted for these facts.
The message about the “bridge with ZP”
One of the elements that has placed Martínez Sola in the spotlight comes from the messages intercepted and analyzed by the UDEF.
According to the disseminated documentation, shareholder Rodolfo Reyes communicated to Martínez Sola that a contact channel had been opened with Zapatero's environment. The message said: “The bridge with ZP has just been made”. It then identified Manuel Aarón Fajardo as the contact, related to actions between Spain and Venezuela.
The expression “bridge” interests researchers because the case tries to reconstruct what contacts were activated to bring the management of Plus Ultra closer to the former president of the Government and, from there, to officials of the Administration.
The messages do not prove the commission of a crime by themselves. They are part of a set of indications that the judge must contrast with statements, business documentation, and possible economic movements.
The call with Zapatero
The case also includes a telephone conversation of about eleven minutes between Julio Martínez Sola and José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, which took place approximately one year before the rescue was approved.
The existence of that call appears in the judicial order, although its content has not been fully disclosed. Investigators want to clarify whether it was related to the financial needs of the airline or with future dealings with the Government.
Zapatero has denied pressuring the SEPI or the Executive to favor Plus Ultra. In his statement, he maintained that he did not intervene in the granting of the 53 million and rejected having received money as compensation for the rescue.
The internal conversations of Plus Ultra
The police reports include conversations in which officials of Plus Ultra sought support to ensure the approval of public aid.
In one of those exchanges, the majority shareholder requested a “push” to have more guarantees about the rescue. Martínez Sola suggested contacting the SEPI, Julio Martínez Martínez, or Zapatero to obtain security about the granting.
Another conversation disseminated in the context of the investigation shows airline executives evaluating possible political avenues through Zapatero and the then Minister of Transport, José Luis Ábalos.
The criminal relevance of those messages is not determined. The judge must decide whether they reflect a legitimate search for institutional support for a struggling company or if they point to a scheme of undue influence.
Julio Martínez Sola is not “Julito” Martínez
One of the usual confusions in the case arises from the presence of two investigated individuals with very similar names.
Julio Martínez Sola is the president and founder of Plus Ultra.
Julio Martínez Martínez, known as Julito, is a businessman close to Zapatero and administrator of Análisis Relevante, the consultancy that paid the former president for advisory work.
Both appear in the procedure, but they are not the same person nor did they have the same role. Martínez Sola was at the head of the rescued airline. Martínez Martínez appears as a possible intermediary in the investigated dealings.
Separating them is key to understanding the case and avoiding attributing actions of one to the other.
What his statement can contribute
According to published information, Martínez Sola is preparing a document in which he would acknowledge that he knew Zapatero was behind some dealings made to obtain public aid. Those versions must be formally presented and contrasted in the procedure.
The value of any statement will depend on its coherence with the intercepted messages, the documentation provided, and the questions from the Prosecutor's Office, the accusations, and the defenses.
The National Court is not only seeking to know who spoke with whom. It is trying to determine whether those dealings had real effects on the granting of the rescue and whether there were payments linked to that influence.
What the National Court is investigating
The case revolves around three main issues: whether Plus Ultra used political influences to obtain the rescue, whether there were payments or commissions associated with those dealings, and whether companies or consulting contracts were used to conceal the destination of the money.
Julio Martínez Sola appears in that scenario as president of the beneficiary company and as an interlocutor in relevant conversations for the investigation.
His criminal responsibility is not determined. The case remains open and the accusations must demonstrate that the investigated dealings went beyond seeking institutional support for an airline that was going through a critical situation during the pandemic.