Manuel García Castellón, a judge at the National Court, led inquiries into BBVA and the involvement of retired commissioner José Manuel Villarejo. He was questioned as a witness on Monday, while the current organization president, Carlos Torres, refrained from making decisions on this matter until mid-2018 when the scandal surfaced. He attended the discussions surrounding the issue at the time and is mentioned in the official minutes.
The Central Instruction Court No. 6 accepted the request to summon Torres, a move proposed by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office for a distinct portion of the Villarejo case. The aim was to determine whether there exists a genuine, functioning regulatory compliance culture within the bank and to clarify the potential criminal liability of BBVA.
Legal sources described the declaration as tense and at moments uncomfortable. Bank insiders noted that Torres, as a witness, provided testimony in a calm, normal manner, answering questions from the prosecution and other parties involved.
Throughout his testimony, Torres denied meetings with the commissioner or any preexisting relationship with the organization before the 2018 scandal. He recounted how he joined BBVA in 2008, even recalling that the incident occurred on his first day of work, describing it as the day Lehman Brothers collapsed. Regarding his interactions with the president during the recruitment period, he stated that they had only met at a wedding in those years.
In this separate chapter of the broader nine-part macro case, both BBVA and its former president Francisco González face charges. Investigations focus on services arranged by the bank for CENYT, Villarejo’s company, for various projects between 2004 and 2017, during which the organization is said to have paid more than ten million euros to the commissioner.
Independent external researchers
Torres told the judge that the case was initially handled by the bank’s internal audit department, but from January 2019 it shifted to external independent investigators, including the firms Garrigues and Uría and the consulting firm PwC, which led the forensic analyses. He asserted, as supported by the bank, that he had no involvement in the incident and did not issue any instructions; the forensic work was conducted by these external parties, according to official bank communications.
Along the way, he claimed that the investigators, not the bank, made the crucial decisions. Although he was briefly listed among potential subjects of inquiry, his name was later removed from the internal investigation roster. Once the matter moved outside the bank in January 2019, the institution no longer controlled the process; the external researchers assumed responsibility, and he suggested that data from their devices did not affect the case.
Torres stated that the organization’s leadership and the council had issued a clear mandate and fully cooperated with judicial authorities. He noted that this cooperation was reflected in the minutes and that the bank had contributed to every revelation arising from the investigation.
The judge had explained that when the subpoena for Torres was prepared, it was not feasible to take a deposition at that moment. María Jesús Arribas de Paz, the organization’s global legal director and the person reporting to the committee on ongoing activities, exercised her right not to declare at that time.
BBVA objected to the subpoena for Arribas de Paz, arguing that her testimony could violate professional secrecy and attorney-client privilege, as well as the organization’s right to defense. The bank contended that the subpoena aimed to compel her to testify as a witness about facts known only through her role as the organization’s legal expert and internal attorney.