UEFA Responds to Real Madrid's Accusations Against Barcelona in the Negrera Case

UEFA confirms receipt of documents from Real Madrid regarding Barcelona's payments to Negrera
Translated by Qiyas from الراي — Original source
The Negreira case has entered a new phase after UEFA confirmed on Thursday that it had received a large volume of documents from Spanish club Real Madrid related to the ongoing investigation into rivals Barcelona and the case of Jose Maria Enrici Negreira, former vice-president of the Spanish Football Federation’s Technical Referees Committee.
UEFA stated that its ethics and disciplinary inspectors had also received these documents, adding that they would be taken into account as part of their continuous review of the matter.
UEFA’s confirmation came after Real Madrid submitted a file containing documents and evidence it said were linked to payments received by companies associated with Negreira from Barcelona between 2001 and 2018.
Last June, Real Madrid announced that it had filed a complaint with UEFA’s disciplinary bodies, calling for sporting sanctions against Barcelona and arguing that the case posed a threat to the integrity of competitions, in its view.
Following UEFA’s latest statement, Real Madrid issued a statement urging that the investigations proceed as quickly as possible to their conclusion, and that the relevant authorities make appropriate decisions based on what is established during the inquiry.
For its part, Barcelona insisted that UEFA’s statement did not mean opening a new case or reopening a closed file, clarifying that the proceedings initiated in 2023 had never been closed, and that the club had so far complied with the requirements set by UEFA’s investigators.
The case centers on payments made by Barcelona to companies linked to Negreira, who at the time held the position of vice-president of the Spanish FA’s Technical Referees Committee. According to Spanish investigations, the total value of these payments exceeded 7 million euros between 2001 and 2018. Barcelona maintains that the payments were for technical reports and referee-related consulting services.