“Think that Barrabés is the good one and the others have to go down no matter what.” This is one of the messages analyzed by the Central Operational Unit (UCO) of the Civil Guard in a report that it delivered last February to the European Prosecutor’s Office and that is now in the hands of Judge Juan Carlos Barrabés, who for alleged prevarication and fraud against the interests of the European Union. The agents maintain that the temporary joint venture of companies (UTE) made up of The Valley and a company from Barrabés was “the most benefited bidder” due to the “arbitrariness” that they see in the process of awarding a contract for the public company Red.es that is under suspicion in the separate piece of the Begoña Gómez case.
In the report advanced by The Spanishto which this newspaper has had access, the Civil Guard maintains that the “conditions” that marked the evaluation of the criteria subject to value judgment in the award process had a “direct reflection in the final result of the tender.” “All this with clear intentionality and knowledge of the evaluators,” they point out. And he emphasizes that in the case of the temporary union of companies in which Barrabés participated “the predilection for its offer is observed throughout the valuation process.”
The agents explain that Barrabés’ offer was, “from the beginning”, one of the candidates in which the Digital Economy team showed “greatest interest.” The other favorite was Everis, but at one point there was “a marked change of mind” by Luis Prieto, director of said department of Red.es, who participated in the preparation of the bidding documents and signed the approval reports. According to the report, Everis was “the main victim” of the “arbitrariness” of Red.es.
Among the facts that the UCO highlights in the “beginnings” of the award process is a message sent in January 2021 by a technician who participated in the preparation of the assessment reports: “Think that Barrabés is the good one and the others have to go down no matter what.” There is also another message signed in February of that year by another technique senior which says: “If there are preferences… it’s almost better to know beforehand… for me nt for learning and datahack are the best, better than Barrabés, what do I do?”
For the Civil Guard, the “difference in treatment” in the award process “is even manifested when it comes to penalizing some aspect of the offer.” The agents assure that they are struck by the “excessive benevolence” with which the changes that harmed the temporary union of companies formed by Barrabés were faced compared to the “rigority” that was applied to other bidders.
The UCO maintains that the evaluation of all offers was not approached with “uniformity based on pre-established criteria.” “On the contrary, different elements are observed that underlie a decisive arbitrariness that marks the future of the tenders,” he insists. The main example, he points out, is “the reversal of the approach to the valuation process”, which “alters the pre-established order”. And it highlights that, in addition, “additional adaptations are made to mask as much as possible” the “modifications” that were made throughout the award process.
Thus, the agents consider that the business union project in which Barrabés participated, “beyond” being classified in the first phase with a “considerable advantage,” was “the main beneficiary.”
