Texte original publié par No es época para tontos.
A billion euros, a failed bank, a last-minute change in the law — and a private company whose appointment raises serious questions about how one of Andorra’s most sensitive financial liquidations is being controlled.
This investigation examines new reporting published by the Andorran investigative newspaper La Valira concerning the bankruptcy and liquidation of Banca Privada d’Andorra (BPA). At the centre of the story is a striking chronology: Andorran insolvency law originally required the controllers of a bankruptcy to come from the body of creditors and to perform the role without remuneration. The law was subsequently amended so that outside companies could be appointed and paid. Weeks after the amendment entered into force, OCPS Auditors i Consultors SL, headed by Eduard Jordi Bové, was appointed as controller of the BPA liquidation.
According to La Valira, negotiations with OCPS had already been under way for more than a year before the legislative change, and an economic agreement had reportedly been reached. That chronology raises an unavoidable question: was the law modified to accommodate an appointment that had effectively already been decided?
The investigation goes further. It examines the role of the AREB, the judicial management of the BPA bankruptcy, the resignation of previous controllers, the lack of transparency surrounding approximately €1 billion in residual assets and deposits, and the repeated demands for accounting information from political opposition groups and institutional bodies.
It also explores the background of OCPS and the historical connections described in the sources to figures and companies investigated in Spain in connection with the Pujol family, the 3% corruption case, Efial and Operation Termyca. These references do not establish criminal guilt, but they raise legitimate questions about due diligence, conflicts of interest and the criteria used to select the company entrusted with supervising one of the most controversial financial procedures in Andorran history.
This episode does not ask the audience to accept allegations as facts. It reconstructs the chronology, separates documented events from accusations and inference, examines possible institutional explanations, and asks what any functioning democracy should be able to answer clearly:
Who decided? When was the decision made? Why was the law changed? Who benefits? Who supervises the supervisors? And why has so much of the BPA liquidation remained hidden from public scrutiny?
At stake is more than the fate of a failed bank. It is a question of institutional accountability, judicial transparency and the concentration of power in one of Europe’s smallest democracies.
Based on reporting by La Valira, with analysis of the documentary sources surrounding the BPA liquidation.
