European Public Prosecutor’s Office: different measures and weights in Spain

Overall, everyone goes from lie to lie.

The opposition that has suddenly fallen in love with Europe and its instruments –we all remember PASOK’s “EEC and NATO are the same syndicate” and the denunciations against the “European nomenklatura” of SYRIZA and Tsipras– among other things has made us dizzy that then Greece is the only country “attacking” European Public Prosecutor, which, they say, is unthinkable for New Democracy’s “we’re staying in Europe”.

All in all, they all go from lie to lie. The same Covessi told us at Delphi that all countries renewed the terms of office of European prosecutors in… its own way, while it is known that many countries joined long after and therefore have not yet completed the five-year cycle of their prosecutors, while in Spain renewals were made for all three years. Without even opening a nostril! In fact, the truth is one: By no one and never in Greece was the institution as an institution challenged. Just as the actions of OLAF, Eurojust and Europol were never questioned.

What we are judging is the effectiveness and the way in which the respective heads of these organisations behave, whom we have the right to judge and about whom we reserve the right to express our opinion. What we judge is whether they respect the principle of separation of powers and whether they are limited to their mandate, that is, their mandate. We judge and we compare. One of the biggest lies is that we are the only country that has problems with (this particular) European Public Prosecutor. Problems and conflicts have occurred in Belgium, and Italy, and Malta, and Croatia, and Ireland, and Spain.

The clash with Spain that… failed

Spain deserves special attention. On 28 March 2022, the following announcement was published on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) website:

“Statement by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office on the jurisdictional crisis in Spain

The European Public Prosecutor’s Office regrets the controversy that has arisen regarding the adjudication of a specific case in Spain. As a general rule, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office does not comment on specific cases, but considers that this particular case has wider implications. The purpose of any investigation by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is to establish the facts in order to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of an offence against the financial interests of the European Union. In order to avoid duplication and in the interests of the defence (i.e. the EU’s financial interests), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation establishes a priority responsibility for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to investigate all facts relating to possible fraud against the financial interests of the European Union. In this context, given the novel nature of our work and the complex interaction between the national and European laws under which we operate, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office would like to recall that, in the event of a conflict of jurisdiction, a referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union should always be considered. Therefore, this morning, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office asked the General Financial Council to seriously consider this option.”

“Take it to court”, but not through… Delphi

So, Sanchez’s Spain had challenged the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and Ms. Covesi, through a statement of course and not through conferences and press conferences (as she never attempted to do there what she does in Greece), also told the Spaniards “take it to court”.

Of course, the Spaniards neither argued among themselves nor went to court. They didn’t care, and the case was dealt with by the Spanish justice system. The conflict of jurisdiction arose because of the Coldo case and over possible irregularities regarding the purchase of protective masks for COVID-19. As part of the funds came from the EU, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office considered that it was its own responsibility. However, the Spanish judiciary ruled that it would first decide for itself whether European money was illegally wasted and then inform the European Public Prosecutor. Otherwise, i.e. if the masks were purchased but the tenders were not carried out in the normal procedures – possibly because of extraordinary laws passed across Europe to speed up the procedures, even by direct award – there was no reason for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to get involved.

So, on the one hand, Spanish justice continued as normal – a fact that led to the arrest of the former transport minister,Luis Abalos, and his adviser, Caldo García, a case with a fictional scenario and ticklish interpersonal relationships – and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office continued its own investigations. Without, of course, Ms. Covesi going to Madrid to wag her finger at them. Strange things indeed!

The Balearics followed protocol

And while the Spanish judiciary was investigating the case, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office announced (4 March 2024) that its Madrid office was opening an investigation into possible fraud regarding purchases of health equipment, including protective masks,as the authorities in the Balearics and Canaries preferred a particular company. The agreements had been signed by socialist regional governors Frantina Armengol and Engel Victor Torres, who had since moved to the national parliament and government.

The press release said that as one of the contracts had been co-financed by the EU, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office had requested additional information to determine whether the case fell within its mandate. After the information was provided, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office took the decision, as stated in the statement, to open an investigation in order to investigate all contracts with the company in question. However, it declined to confirm whether it was conducting an investigation into the case, as the agency “does not comment on ongoing investigations or publicly confirm which cases it is working on, so as not to jeopardise any ongoing investigations”. Only in Greece this protocol did not apply and everyone knew everything before the case files were formed!

Titles end with a simple update

On 13 October 2025, however, the Spanish Supreme Court told the European Public Prosecutor’s Office that “for the time being” there was no evidence of mismanagement of EU funds. In the case, which involves other issues, apart from Abalos and Caldo, other senior members of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party are involved, including Santos Cerdan, the party’s former organisational secretary.