The president of LaLiga, Javier Tebas, maneuvers so that the call reaches the courts as soon as possible Negreira case, in which the Prosecutor’s Office investigates the payment by FC Barcelona of close to seven million euros to the former vice president of the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA, the governing body of the referees) José María Enríquez Negreira for alleged verbal advice. With this objective, the sports body that he presides over has submitted a letter to the judge of the National Court Alejandro Abascal so that, within the case that this magistrate is following for the alleged irregularities of the former president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) Ángel María Villar ―the so-called soule case―, inquire into the payment of at least 4,410 euros by the Federation to Negreira’s son, Javier Enríquez Romero, for construction work coaching (advice), according to a written advance by Vozpopuli and to which EL PAÍS has had access. Tebas, during the public act held on Monday in which he demanded the resignation of the president of FC Barcelona, Joan Laporta, asked the Prosecutor’s Office to file a complaint as soon as possible for the Negreira case, and assured that he had sent him information that could be useful for the cause.
The brief presented in the National Court is, therefore, a movement parallel to the petition to the Prosecutor’s Office and in a case, the soule case, which has been open since 2017. “Everything adds up”, LaLiga sources have pointed out to this newspaper to justify it. In the document, dated the 17th, the legal representative of LaLiga, appearing in the case against Villar as a private prosecution, points out that “news related to certain events that could be criminal in nature” related to Enríquez Negreira have emerged in the media. and his son, “with respect to whom it is reported that he provided coaching precisely in favor of the RFEF and the CTA”.
The document adds that these advisory services were paid for with the funds that LaLiga delivers to the Federation and of which 18.75% came from the collection of the pools. “The RFEF has not provided the supporting invoices for the recorded expenses, preventing us from verifying whether they could even have existed, or for what and for whom said services were provided, their duration, the hourly price, or who authorized their payment,” he adds. the letter from LaLiga, which then slides an unspecified accusation as a result of what has been known in recent days: “The choice of the provider [en referencia al hijo de Negreira] It seems clear what he is responding to.”
LaLiga details in its letter, season by season, these payments from the Federation to Negreira’s son based on the documentation already included in the summary of the soule case and, specifically, of tables in Excel format that the RFEF itself delivered at the National Court at the request of the magistrate. Thus, it details that in the 2011-2012 season the Federation paid Javier Enríquez 1,006 euros as a “PF coach. Saint”. The following season the payment was 600 euros for “work coaching”, and the 2013-2014 of 820 euros, in this case for “gtos [gastos] sessions coaching”. The amount rose to 992 euros in the following season for “gtos [gastos] coaching PF” together with the description “other meetings”, amount and concepts identical to those used for the 2015-2016 season. In total, 4,410 euros, of which the Federation allegedly has not delivered the corresponding invoices to the court, according to LaLiga.
For all these reasons, the body presided over by Tebas asks the judge to transfer these data to the General Intervention of the State Administration (IGAE, dependent on the Ministry of Finance and responsible for carrying out various expert opinions on movements of money under suspicion. ) to take them into account in the report that the magistrate commissioned, at the request of the Prosecutor’s Office, on “the contribution of public money to cover expenses for arbitration fees and other arbitration expenses of official competitions of a state and professional nature (1st and 2nd division). The purpose of the report is to detect the possible “diversion of public funds for purposes unrelated to the subsidy and authorized obligations.” A report from the Intervention incorporated into the case already revealed alleged irregularities in the accounting of expenses for per diems and travel in Federation bodies.
You can follow EL PAÍS Sports on Facebook and Twitteror sign up here to receive our weekly newsletter.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits