Original text published by No es época para tontos.
This investigation by La Valira TV, presented by Rachael and Josep, agentic AIs from Blaxxun, examines the Andorran Government’s plan to expand its right of first refusal and pre-emption over properties arising from bankruptcies and insolvency proceedings, including cases in which a public auction receives no bids and the asset can later be transferred by direct award. The central question is simple: what happens when the State is no longer only the regulator, but also becomes a privileged buyer inside the market it regulates?
The stated objective is social: increasing the public housing stock. But the programme argues that the mechanism can alter auction incentives. A bidder must spend money on legal checks, valuations and deposits before making an offer. If the Government may later match the winning bid or intervene after a failed auction, participation may fall. The episode refers to German research showing fewer bidders and lower final prices under preferential acquisition rights, while warning that those findings cannot be mechanically transferred to Andorra.
The most sensitive point is the deserted auction. If there are no bids, who determines why it failed? Who verifies that the lack of competition was genuine? Who checks whether publicity was sufficient, whether privileged information existed, or whether the State’s position discouraged buyers? And who audits the procedure before allowing the Administration itself to receive the property by direct award?
The investigation reviews precedents of auction manipulation. It recalls the Milan cases and the Spanish “subastillas”, where professional bidders could agree in advance who would obtain a property, neutralise competition and depress the price. It then turns to Operation Habitatge Dos in Girona, launched in 2009 and made public in 2013. The Guardia Civil investigated 35 people over an alleged system involving privileged information, public employees, professional bidders, opaque companies and manipulated prices. The programme is explicit: they cannot be described as convicted without a final judgment. The unresolved question is what happened to the case, whether it reached trial or was dismissed.
The hardest section concerns judge Xavier Colom Pich. The investigation reconstructs how Colom had previously intervened in civil enforcement proceedings linked to an embargoed building in Sant Julià de Lòria and later appeared as a private bidder in an auction managed by a saig, ultimately acquiring real-estate units from that building. His defence is also presented: he acted as a private citizen, the auction was managed by a saig, more than thirty people participated, and he had not personally carried out the valuation or specific seizure. But the ethical question remains: can a judge truly separate his private identity from the institutional knowledge accumulated through a case in which he previously intervened?
The matter led to disciplinary action by the Consell Superior de la Justícia and to a dispute that reached the Tribunal Constitucional. The programme recalls the role of Josep Maria Pijuan, the initial refusal to open a criminal investigation, the intervention of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Constitutional Court’s demand for an adequate judicial response. Andorra later prohibited judges and magistrates from participating in auctions arising from proceedings in which they had intervened.
The investigation then opens the Girona–Andorra chapter. It names Carles Cruz Moratones, Fàtima Ramírez Souto, Víctor Correas Sitjes and Hugo Novales Bilbao, all with professional links to Girona and judicial functions in Andorra. There is no documentary evidence linking any of them to Operation Habitatge Dos. The criticism is institutional, not personal. It asks whether it is healthy for a microstate to depend so heavily on magistrates from a neighbouring system, including judges who have exercised functions in Spain and Andorra simultaneously.
Finally, the episode demands safeguards: publication of auction files, identification of beneficial owners, independent valuations, forensic audits of deserted auctions, transparency over direct awards, conflict-of-interest declarations, traceability of saigs and purchasers, parliamentary scrutiny and rapid judicial review.
