Lorraine Williamson
Spain’s Plus Ultra case has taken a new turn after police investigators reportedly told a judge that key documents linked to the airline’s public rescue were missing, empty, or impossible to open.
The latest development centres on the role of SEPI, Spain’s state-owned industrial holding company, which managed the rescue fund used during the pandemic. According to Cadena SER, the UDEF economic crime unit has complained to the Audiencia Nacional that SEPI sent incomplete material, including empty folders and unusable files, in response to court requests for documentation on the €53 million aid package granted to Plus Ultra.
The case has become one of Spain’s most politically sensitive investigations because former prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero is now under investigation. He is due to appear before the Audiencia Nacional on 2 June. RTVE says police reports place him at the top of an alleged influence network linked to the airline rescue, although the allegations remain under judicial investigation.
Why this matters now
The immediate question is no longer only why Plus Ultra received public aid. It is also whether investigators have received all the documents needed to examine how that decision was made.
According to Cadena SER, UDEF told the judge that some of the material supplied by SEPI lacked key communications from the period when the rescue was being processed. Investigators also reportedly flagged missing emails, minutes and certificates, despite some of those documents either existing elsewhere or being publicly available.
That matters because SEPI’s records could help clarify how the rescue was assessed, who intervened, and whether the airline met the conditions required to receive state support.
What was the Plus Ultra rescue?
Plus Ultra Líneas Aéreas received a €53 million rescue during the Covid crisis, when Spain created a fund to support companies considered strategic and temporarily affected by the pandemic.
The decision was controversial from the start. Critics questioned whether the airline was truly strategic, while the government defended the rescue as lawful and properly assessed.
The case later moved into the courts, where investigators began examining possible misuse of funds, alleged influence-peddling and the role of several business figures connected to the airline and associated companies.
Ábalos Koldo masks trial opens in Supreme Court
Zapatero’s role under scrutiny
Zapatero, who governed Spain from 2004 to 2011, is now being investigated in connection with the wider case.
RTVE reports that UDEF documents seen by the broadcaster describe more than 300 pages of conversations, emails and financial material. According to RTVE, the police reports suggest Zapatero held a “non-visible leadership” role in an alleged influence network connected to the Plus Ultra rescue.
The former prime minister has not been convicted of any offence. Being investigated in Spain does not mean guilt. It means the judge considers there are reasons to question him formally as part of the inquiry.
Money flows now form a central part of the inquiry
Financial movements around Zapatero and people close to him have become a major strand of the investigation.
El País reported on Monday that Zapatero received €2.6 million between 2020 and 2025 through 174 transfers from companies, some of them now under scrutiny in the case. The newspaper says the payments were described as income for conferences, consultancy and international mediation work, but investigators are examining whether some of the money was linked to the alleged influence network.
Earlier reporting also focused on payments connected to Análisis Relevante, a consultancy linked to businessman Julio Martínez Martínez. El País says €490,780 paid to Zapatero through that route forms part of the material under investigation.
Accounts and company links
The Audiencia Nacional has also ordered account-blocking measures linked to the investigation.
Euronews reported last week that judge José Luis Calama ordered the freezing of accounts belonging to Zapatero and his daughters in connection with the inquiry. The measure is precautionary and linked to amounts under investigation, rather than a finding of guilt.
El País has also reported that money moved through companies connected to people close to the former prime minister, including a company linked to his daughters and other entities now being examined by investigators.
These details are politically explosive. They are also legally delicate. The court still has to decide what weight, if any, should be given to each payment, contract or message.
Why SEPI’s documents matter
The reported dispute over SEPI’s files could become important because it goes to the evidence trail behind the public rescue.
If investigators cannot access complete documentation, they may struggle to reconstruct how the aid decision was made. That includes internal assessments, communications, approvals and any exchanges involving people outside the formal process.
Cadena SER reports that UDEF complained that a second response from SEPI contained even less documentation than the first. The broadcaster says the police unit believes key material from the rescue period has not yet been supplied.
For the court, the issue is likely to be whether missing or unusable documents are the result of technical problems, administrative gaps or something more significant.
Political fallout grows
The case is already shaping Spain’s political week.
Opposition parties are using the investigation to increase pressure on the government and the PSOE. At the same time, government figures have defended the legality of the rescue and stressed that the judicial process must run its course.
The controversy also comes after a weekend protest in Madrid calling for Pedro Sánchez to resign. While not solely about Plus Ultra, the demonstration reflected a wider atmosphere of political pressure around corruption allegations and institutional trust.
The hearing
Zapatero is expected to appear before the Audiencia Nacional on 2 June. That hearing may clarify how he responds to the allegations and whether the judge imposes any additional precautionary measures.
Investigators are also likely to keep pressing for documentation from SEPI and other bodies involved in the rescue. The court may need to decide whether further requests, searches or technical analysis are required.
For now, the Plus Ultra case is moving on two fronts. One is political, where the fallout is immediate. The other is judicial, where the pace is slower and the language matters. The central point remains unchanged: serious allegations are being investigated, but the court has not reached a verdict.