Justice keeps under suspicion public works contracts of the Ministry of Transport for an amount of 537.2 million euros. The National Court is investigating possible irregularities in awards made by the Administrator of Railway Infrastructures (Adif) and the General Directorate of Roads, within the case that examines the alleged collection of illegal commissions linked to the so-called Koldo case. The investigations are focused on determining whether certain tenders were manipulated to benefit construction companies in exchange for payments to political officials and people in their circle.
According to ABC this Sunday, November 1, the judge of the National Court Ismael Moreno continues reviewing the documentation of up to eleven public procurement files, while the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office is paying special attention to six awards. The investigation affects operations carried out during the period of José Luis Ábalos at the head of the Ministry of Transport, although some of the business relationships examined by the investigators go back to previous years.
Among the companies appearing in the proceedings stands out Acciona Construcción, awardee of different multimillion-euro contracts, on occasion through temporary business associations (UTE). The Civil Guard and the judicial investigators are trying to clarify whether these business structures could have been used to channel undue payments to those who allegedly would have intervened to favor the awards.
The figure of 537.2 million euros corresponds to the value of the works examined, not to the money that Justice considers proven as embezzled. This distinction is fundamental: the investigation must determine whether criminal irregularities existed, who participated in them and what amounts could really have been diverted.
Eleven Adif and Roads contracts under the scrutiny of the National Court
The judicial proceedings examine awards made by two bodies dependent on the Ministry of Transport: Adif and the General Directorate of Roads. The analysis of the General Intervention of the State Administration (IGAE), sent to the National Court, includes five railway contracts and six road contracts, awarded mainly between 2018 and 2021.
The report from Hacienda, known last March, detected possible irregularities in the administrative procedures and in the modifications made after the awards. Among the issues pointed out are the weight of subjective criteria in the evaluation of the bids and the subsequent increases in the budget of certain works, some of them close to 20% of the initial price.
The technicians of the IGAE observed that, in several files, the technical evaluation played a decisive role in selecting the awarded company, even when its proposal was not the cheapest. They also warned of contractual modifications that, according to their conclusions, did not comply with the applicable regulations. These elements form part of the material that the judge is examining to determine whether the administrative anomalies could have responded to a coordinated action to favor certain construction companies.
The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office is focusing especially its inquiries on six of the awards, although the documentary analysis covers a broader set of contracts. The objective is not only to check whether the public procurement rules were violated, but to establish whether those possible irregularities were related to the payment of illegal commissions.
Acciona and the alleged kickbacks: what the UCO is investigating
Acciona Construcción occupies a central place in the inquiries for its participation in several of the awards examined. The magistrate of the Supreme Court Leopoldo Puente already highlighted, in June 2025, the presence of the construction company in different investigated public works and the fact that some of its bids had been selected thanks to evaluation criteria other than price.
The judicial suspicions point to the possible existence of a structure in which certain companies obtained public contracts and, in exchange, committed to making payments to intermediaries and officials with the capacity to influence the awards. Among the people linked to that alleged operation are Santos Cerdán, José Luis Ábalos and Koldo García, whose roles have been examined in different phases of the investigation.
One of the elements that have aroused the interest of the investigators is the relationship between Acciona and Servinabar 2000, a company linked to businessman Antxon Alonso and in which, according to the documentation found by the Guardia Civil, Cerdán would have had a 45% stake. Servinabar participated in certain public works projects together with Acciona through business collaboration formulas, whose economic justification and operation are being analyzed.
The UCO has also investigated the relationships between the political officials and the businessmen who participated in the awards. The question that Justice is trying to resolve is whether some of those relationships served to alter the contracting procedures and subsequently distribute the benefits obtained through irregular payments.
The appearance of a company in the investigated files does not in itself imply that its criminal liability has been established. It will be necessary to determine the specific involvement of each natural or legal person and whether there is sufficient evidence of the offenses examined.
The judge even raised commissions of more than five million euros
The amount of the investigated awards was already the subject of a judicial analysis in June 2025. In the order by which he agreed to the provisional prison of Santos Cerdán, Judge Leopoldo Puente placed the value of the works awarded under suspicion at 537.2 million euros and raised the possibility that the illegal commissions could have reached an amount higher than initially identified.
The judge then pointed out that Ábalos and Koldo García would have obtained or had committed payments close to one million euros, according to the indications examined. From that figure, he raised an illustrative hypothetical case: if the commissions had represented 1% of the total amount of the awards, the money distributed would have exceeded five million euros.
However, this was a judicial hypothesis and not an established amount of embezzlement. The calculation sought to explain why the investigators considered it possible that other people or companies had economically benefited from the alleged scheme.
The Civil Guard had also identified, in a report delivered to the Supreme Court in June 2025, 620,000 euros in payments that Cerdán allegedly would have managed, of which 550,000 would be related to two Acciona awards in Murcia. The investigation continues examining the possible connections between these amounts, the contracts and the economic movements of the people involved.
Santos Cerdán, Pardo de Vera and former executives, among those under investigation
The case being handled by Ismael Moreno includes former officials of the Administration and businessmen related to the awards examined. Among them are the former PSOE Organization Secretary Santos Cerdán, the former president of Adif Isabel Pardo de Vera and the former Director General of Roads Javier Herrero, whose role in the contracting procedures is being investigated.
Also appearing in the proceedings are former officials linked to Acciona Construcción, among them Justo Vicente Pelegrini, Tomás Olarte, Manuel José García Alconchel and Fernando Merino. The investigation also reaches businessmen related to other companies that took part in public awards, such as Obras Públicas y Regadíos (OPR) and Levantina, Ingeniería y Construcción (LIC).
The origin of this part of the proceedings lies in the investigations carried out by the Supreme Court into the alleged collection of bribes and in the statements of the businessman Víctor de Aldama, who pointed to the existence of possible mechanisms of influence over certain Transport awards.
Among the issues examined by Justice are the personal and business relationships surrounding the public officials, the contacts maintained during the contracting procedures and the possible asset growth of some of those under investigation. In the case of Santos Cerdán, the proceedings have also paid attention to his assets and those of his family environment during the period under investigation.
The status of under investigation does not amount to a conviction, and responsibilities will have to be individualized according to the evidence incorporated into the proceedings.
The Treasury report detected project modifications close to 20%
One of the keys to understanding the scope of the investigation lies in the results of the report prepared by the Intervención General de la Administración del Estado. The inspectors pointed out possible anomalies both in the initial valuation of the contracts and in the economic modifications approved once the works were awarded.
Among the files examined appear actions such as the extension of the Centenario de Sevilla bridge, as well as different railway and road projects. Hacienda detected that some contracts experienced budget increases close to 20%, a relevant percentage because of the legal requirements applicable to modifications of public contracts.
In certain cases, the auditing body questioned whether the modifications were sufficiently justified or whether they had been processed correctly. It also identified situations in which the formulas used to score the bids could alter the final result of a tender, favoring one proposal over other competitors.
However, an overrun or a contractual modification do not automatically constitute a crime. Large infrastructure works may require technical and economic adjustments during their execution. The question the investigation must resolve is whether the changes examined were justified and complied with the law or whether they were deliberately used to benefit certain companies.
A different investigation from the inquiries into the maintenance of the AVE Madrid-Sevilla
The review of the Transport contracts coincides with the increase in public attention on railway infrastructure after the serious accidents in Adamuz and Urda. However, it is worth distinguishing between the different judicial investigations opened.
On the one hand, the Audiencia Nacional is examining the possible irregular awards linked to the Koldo case, with a primary focus on public contracts, business relations and the alleged collection of illegal commissions. On the other hand, the European Public Prosecutor's Office and the UCO are investigating possible crimes of fraud and embezzlement related to maintenance contracts for the Madrid-Sevilla high-speed line financed with community funds.
Both proceedings have different objects and scopes of investigation, although they affect bodies of the same ministry. Neither of them allows concluding, for the moment, that the possible economic irregularities investigated were the cause of the railway accidents.
The cases aimed at clarifying the technical circumstances and the possible criminal responsibilities for the incidents continue their own judicial proceedings.
What may happen now with the contracts under investigation
The investigation by the Audiencia Nacional continues to focus on reconstructing the award procedures, analyzing the movements of money, and determining whether there were agreements to alter public tenders. To do this, the judge has reports from the Guardia Civil, administrative documentation, and economic analyses from the IGAE.
Among the pending issues are the identification of possible beneficiaries of the commissions, the verification of the services actually provided by the companies involved, and the determination of whether the irregularities detected in the tenders may constitute crimes of corruption, embezzlement, or other criminal offenses.
The 537.2 million euros reflect the economic dimension of the awards under suspicion, but they do not constitute an amount allegedly stolen in its entirety. The possible existence of illegal commissions, their definitive amount, and the responsibility of each person under investigation still depend on the outcome of the proceedings.
The case thus keeps under judicial scrutiny a significant part of the public contracting of Transportes during the Ábalos period, with Adif, Carreteras and various construction companies at the center of investigations that seek to clarify whether the administrative decisions were adopted in accordance with the law or were conditioned by particular economic interests.