Documentation relating to the genuine invoices treated as false by the Bilbao Prosecutor's Office

The prosecution classified certain invoices; this annex contains them. The classification and the documents can be read together.

What the compendium contains

• Invoices from identified suppliers of the technological development — programming services, applications and positioning — with their tax data, account numbers and concepts.
• Documented dates: the first invoice of the set is of 15 January 2013; others reach 22 March 2013.
• The supporting receipts accompanying each document.

The classification they received

The indictment maintains that the public funds were released against fictitious invoices (A.11). That classification coexists with three records from the same file: the programme's payments required, under the Order of 21 May 2007 and Article 60.b) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, inspection of materialised investment — not paper (A.5, A.10); each payment was preceded by two inspections; and the validated technical valuations reached 1,778,000 euros (A.10).

The dilemma the invoices inherit

If the invoices were fictitious, the legally mandatory inspections that validated the investment were not carried out or were untruthful — and the responsibility falls on the programme's managers. If the inspections were real, the investment existed and the classification of fiction has no basis. The proceedings did not choose: they maintained at once the inspected payments and the fiction of their object.

A witness not heard

The person who received and processed these invoices at the accountancy firm is recorded describing who handed them over (A.17). That direct source was not taken as evidence.

How to verify it

Open the compendium: read suppliers, concepts and dates. Then look in the proceedings for the accounting expert report declaring each document fictitious. The classification exists; the expert report to sustain it does not appear.

Contrast with the original file

The bank receipts of the real transfers appear in Bilbao Original (DOC-0160): the money trail accompanying these invoices. The accounting expert report that would declare them fictitious, by contrast, does not appear in any of the four volumes of the investigation (DOC-0179 to DOC-0182).