Breaking down the severity of the Nergreira scandal for Barcelona

Significant developments have come to light in the ongoing investigation into FC Barcelona’s payments to José María Enríquez Negreira, the former vice president of the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA). In case you have forgotten, here is a quick recap of the FC Barcelona-Negreira scandal:

• Barcelona made payments totaling €7 million to José María Enríquez Negreira between 2001 and 2018 while he was the vice president of the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA). Barcelona stopped paying Negreira immediately after he left his position within the CTA.
• Joan Laporta quadrupled the payments to Negreira in 2009 during his first term as Barcelona president.
• In a testimony to tax administrators, Negreira stated that Barcelona hired him to ensure that refereeing was “neutral” and that decisions were not made against Barcelona.
• Negreira’s son, Javier Enríquez Romero, was in charge of coaching the referees during that period and would also take them to Barcelona games at the Camp Nou. Something which he continued to do so even after the payments to José María Enríquez Negreira stopped in 2018.
• The judge leading the Barcelona-Negreira case stated in his judicial resolution that these payments caused systemic corruption that favored FC Barcelona.
• Messages from Javier Enríquez Romero were revealed, which included him informing former Barcelona director, Albert Soler, who would officiate the 2017 Copa del Rey between final Barcelona and Alavés three months before the match, with Romero adding that the referee “will try to measure the important decisions”.

While much information has been uncovered about Barcelona’s connection with Negreira, one of the biggest unknowns in the case is the final whereabouts of the money, as Negreira didn’t have many assets under his name.

However, Spanish police have now uncovered “unjustified income” of approximately €3 million in the bank accounts of Negreira’s partner, Ana Paula Rufas.

In their investigation, Spanish police analyzed her banking transactions and identified several unusual operations, including unexplained checks and cash deposits. Specifically, between 1992 and 2023, where approximately €2,977,557.51 was deposited into the 12 accounts held by Ana Paula Rufas.

It’s worth noting that even though Barcelona is currently under investigation for payments made between 2001 and 2018, former club president Josep Maria Bartomeu previously mentioned that Barcelona’s association with Enriquez Negreira began the 1990s.

Whatever her explanations could be, it’s strange to see Negreira’s partner have this sort of money when she was only registered as an active worker for a total of 3,555 days between 2010, and 2023.

Her employment history primarily involves working for DASNIL 95 SL and NILSAD SCP between 2011 and 2018—companies owned by Enríquez Negreira—where she received approximately €150,000 in total.

Interestingly, Spanish police reports also highlight withdrawals of around €3 million from the bank accounts of DASNIL 95 SL and NILSAD SCP during the same period.

Spanish Police’s Devastating Conclusions on FC Barcelona’s Payments

Spanish police recently released a comprehensive 170-page report detailing their investigation into FC Barcelona’s financial transactions.

The report sheds light on how payments were made and reveals insights into the club’s internal structure, including contracts, payments, and organizational hierarchy. Key points from the report include:

• Lack of Evidence for Advisory Services: Despite FC Barcelona’s claim that they hired José María Enríquez Negreira for “advisory services” related to refereeing, the investigation found no evidence supporting this. The payments made to Negreira did not appear to be for legitimate arbitration advisory services.
• Absence of Contracts: Surprisingly, there were no formal contracts between FC Barcelona and Negreira or his associated entities (NILSAD SCP and DASNIL 95 SL). Furthermore, the Spanish Tax Agency inspection also revealed no evidence of service contracts with Negreira’s organizations.  
• Internal Oversight Failures: FC Barcelona’s internal mechanisms failed to detect irregularities in these transactions. These payments continued until 2018 when Negreira was removed from his position at the CTA.

Additionally, it’s important to recall that Spanish police previously stated that the CTA was “not impartial” during Negreira’s tenure as VP. Barcelona’s failure to provide documents related to the alleged advisory work further raises questions about the integrity of the club’s operations during that period.

Laporta’s Involvement and Ernesto Valverde’s Testimony

In addition, the final police report implicates current Barcelona president, Joan Laporta, as the key decision-maker regarding the club’s asset utilization. It concludes that the refereeing analysis services trace back to Laporta’s first tenure with the club.

Notably, Laporta faced an alleged bribery charge related to payments to Enríquez Negreira, but the Barcelona Court later exonerated him due to the statute of limitations.

In court, Laporta emphasized that Negreira lacked authority to manipulate sporting outcomes and clarified that the payments were solely for advisory services.

However, the club’s defense, claiming that Negreira provided refereeing reports, was discredited by former Barcelona manager, Ernesto Valverde. Valverde testified that he knew Negreira from refereeing him during his playing days but had no personal relationship.

Importantly, Valverde asserted that he never saw or received the alleged reports and didn’t require them to prepare for matches. This raises doubts about the substantial payments made by FC Barcelona.

Spanish police now question why Barcelona paid significant sums for seemingly useless reports. If these payments were genuinely for advice, why did Valverde remain unaware of them? The lack of justification for these transactions remains a central concern in the ongoing investigation.

Barcelona’s Economic Levers

While Barcelona continue to deny engaging in bribery, a historical example sheds light on alternative ways to influence refereeing decisions. In 2006, the Calciopoli match-fixing scandal implicated Italian clubs, including Juventus (who were relegated), Milan, Fiorentina, and Lazio.

Although no direct evidence of payments to referees was found, wiretaps revealed team executives speaking with the Italian CTA to have favorable referees officiate their matches.  By doing this, they corrupted the refereeing system to gain an unfair advantage and were punished for it.

Furthermore, the judge leading the FC Barcelona-Negreira case has explicitly stated that proving payments to a referee is unnecessary.

In his court order, Judge Joaquin Aguirre emphasized that the crime of bribery is committed once an official is paid to perform a favor, regardless of whether that favor is ultimately carried out.

This unfolding situation leaves much uncertainty, but it’s not only FC Barcelona’s reputation that hangs in the balance. Spanish football’s image and credibility are equally at risk.

The absence of accountability or punishment for a team involved in such illegal and unethical actions raises questions about the seriousness with which Spanish football is regarded.