The SEPI branch of the Leire case has placed Félix Azcona Lacarra, Director of Internal Management at the State Industrial Participation Company (SEPI), under investigation. His involvement once again reaches the administrative core of the public body and reinforces one of the most sensitive lines of inquiry in the case: whether the alleged influence network had access to internal information, sensitive files, or contacts within SEPI itself.
Azcona is among the 25 individuals summoned as suspects by Judge Santiago Pedraz in the branch examining alleged irregularities in transactions involving public companies, state aid, and strategic corporations. The investigation is examining possible offenses including influence peddling, judicial prevarication, embezzlement, criminal organization or group, and misuse of privileged information. At this stage, being under investigation does not imply conviction or guilt, but it does require him to explain before the National Court what role he played in the files under scrutiny.
His position is particularly relevant because Internal Management is a key area within any public-sector business organization. Such a structure handles procedures, documentation, administrative processes, internal communications, and essential elements for reconstructing how decisions are processed. Therefore, Azcona’s inclusion on the list of suspects cannot be regarded as a minor detail: it affects an area responsible for internal oversight within SEPI.
According to published reports, Azcona worked under the structure of Miguel Ángel Santiago Mesa, SEPI’s Corporate Director, alongside other internal officials such as Rosario Martínez Manzanedo, who was linked to project evaluation. They all appear connected to the investigation because they allegedly participated, at different levels of responsibility, in files that are now being reviewed by the courts.
The case highlights multiple questionable transactions, encompassing the €112.8 million rescue package for Tubos Reunidos, operations tied to Mercasa and ENUSA, deals concerning the Parque Empresarial Principado de Asturias, and activities linked to Forestalia. El País has pointed out that the National Court is currently examining five deals totaling €132.9 million in state support, through which the suspected ring apparently secured over €750,000 in kickbacks.
The most sensitive issue surrounding Azcona is the suspected access to or circulation of internal information. Some media outlets have reported that investigators are examining allegedly fluid communications between SEPI officials and the organization’s former president, Vicente Fernández, considered one of the central figures in the group under investigation alongside Leire Díez and Antxon Alonso. The issue that must now be clarified is whether Azcona provided information, participated in administrative procedures, or in any way intervened in sensitive files, or whether his actions were limited to his ordinary duties within the organization’s administrative structure.
The investigation is not examining only final decisions, but also the process through which those decisions were reached. In a case involving alleged influence over public aid, it is just as important to establish who approved a transaction as it is to determine who prepared the files, who had access to the documentation, who reported on internal procedures, and who may have been able to open doors within the organization. This is where the position of an Internal Management director becomes particularly significant.
Azcona’s investigation reinforces the suspicion that the alleged network may not have operated solely from outside SEPI. If investigators consider it necessary to question internal officials at the organization, it is because they are attempting to reconstruct possible channels of communication and influence within the institution. This line of inquiry is particularly serious for institutional credibility: an influence network requires information, contacts, and opportunities. The courts will have to determine whether those elements existed and who may have provided them.
From a political perspective, the case damages SEPI’s image as a technical and controlled public institution. The entity manages public holdings, oversees strategic companies, and played a key role in the bailouts approved during the pandemic. If its internal departments were exposed to pressure, leaks, or contacts outside ordinary procedures, the problem would not be merely criminal in nature, but would also raise significant concerns about public governance.
Félix Azcona will have to explain to the judge what specific duties he performed within Internal Management, which files passed through his department, what relationship he maintained with other individuals under investigation, and whether he had contact with Vicente Fernández or people linked to the Hirurok group. It will also be crucial to determine whether he had access to or involvement in the Tubos Reunidos file, one of the main focuses of the case, and whether his actions were documented in accordance with SEPI’s internal procedures.
His name is now linked to a probe concerning public funds, key enterprises, massive bailouts, and supposed kickbacks. Because the Director of Internal Management at SEPI features among the targeted individuals, demanding complete clarity surrounding the agency’s records, correspondence, and internal oversight has become essential.
The SEPI branch of the Leire case continues to draw a troubling map: public officials, businesspeople, former executives, technical staff, and internal managers all under judicial scrutiny. Within that map, Félix Azcona Lacarra represents a particularly important piece in determining whether SEPI was the target of external pressure or whether, instead, the alleged network found useful channels within the organization through which to operate. That is the question the National Court must now answer.
Source: El País, Infobae, El Independiente, RTVE, Cadena SER, Diario de Navarra, and La Gaceta.
