Mariano Sánchez Soler: "The corruption of Franco's regime has barely been investigated."

JAYRO SANCHEZ

Mariano Sánchez Soler is a Spanish journalist, writer, and historian. He is known for authoring several fundamental studies on Franco's regime and the ultraconservative legacy of Spanish democracy. He has just published The Franco family SA (Editorial Roca, 2025). We spoke with him about the business and secrets of the longest-running dictatorship of the 20th century in the West.

Franco's figure has always been championed by his defenders as a simple, patriotic soldier with no financial ambitions. However, the data collected in your book demonstrates that he took advantage of his position to amass a vast fortune. Has this fact ever received the attention it deserves?

The myth of the general's austerity was one of the regime's key propaganda elements. The Ministry of Information dedicated itself to selling his image as that of a sober, vice-free soldier who didn't care about money, although this narrative has never stood up to serious scrutiny.

Franco lived in a palace with a court that treated him like a king. He was protected by his faithful Moorish guard, he appeared under a canopy in cathedrals, and was even accorded the highest treatment. Like a good monarch, he knew how to play to the ambitions of others, eventually turning El Pardo into a major center for influence peddling.

In exchange for his mediation work, he received a significant sum of money, which he was able to bequeath to his family. This issue, incidentally, hasn't received enough attention for a long time. The corruption of Franco's regime has barely been investigated, and that's because his nostalgics and the Spanish conservative right have spent these five decades of democracy spreading false stories about him.

Various sources claim that, when he died, the dictator had assets worth between 1.000 and 100.000 million pesetas. As you yourself have stated, the figure is impossible to calculate due to the secrecy with which the regime operated. Much time has passed, but citizens still don't know the truth about the matter. Why is that?

It's actually quite simple. He didn't want to upset his family. It was one of the prices paid during the Transition (1975-1982).

It must be taken into account that this was piloted by high-ranking officials and former ministers of the dictatorship. And that the general's daughter and her husband, the Marquis of Villaverde, were supported and cheered on by thousands of far-right supporters at rallies honoring the Caudillo many years after his death.

They still had power, so they were able to negotiate to be left alone and not question the origin of their business.

Researchers into the Franco family's estate believe its value has now increased to 600 million euros. Will exact figures about their fortune ever be revealed?

I'm afraid that's an impossible task. Time is on their side. Only scattered details are known. Every now and then, a document appears that reveals something we didn't even suspect, like the forged sales contract for the Pazo de Meirás from 1941.

But the problem is that historians and journalists cannot access most of the institutional documents from the period because the Official Secrets Act of 1968, which is still in force, prevents us from doing so.

What is clear is that the dictator held absolute power in Spain for 40 years. This resulted in total impunity, allowing him to receive lavish gifts, set prices, and sit on company boards.

You think that, when I wrote the first version of my book in the 1990s, their descendants held important positions in at least 52 very powerful companies in our country.

In the 1950s and 1960s, several of Franco's military collaborators criticized his surroundings with people who courted his favor to "do business." After the Transition, these same individuals continued to manage enormous national and international business empires. Have they been held accountable for their involvement with the dictatorship and its crimes?

The great bankers and businessmen of democracy became rich during what has been called developmentalism, from 1959 onward. We're talking about figures like March, Fierro, Gonzalo Aguirre, Aznar, and Banús.

With the end of Franco's regime, they faced no difficulties in remaining in their positions. They never had to go to the bench because they were the ones who subsidized some of the political parties that participated in the general elections.

Franco's descendants also manage numerous corporations with substantial profits. In fact, as you point out in your essay, they seem to have specialized in real estate. How would you characterize their activities?

It was to be expected. They took advantage of their stay in El Pardo and the political advantage of their surname. They created public limited companies as fronts to manage their real estate holdings. See the cases of Comercial Flores, Ursaria, and Valdefuentes.

When Carmen Polo died, I discovered that her heirs owned and managed 22 properties. This isn't the only type of business they've entered into, though. Over the years, it's been proven that they've invested in private healthcare, construction, contracting, and so on.

in the pages of The Franco family SA You describe the slow but consistent loss of privileges following the dictator's death. However, not all of his former protégés forgot who their benefactors had been. Does the Franco surname still enjoy respect and complicity half a century after the dictatorship?

It still carries weight. There are those who use it for political purposes, attempting to brandish it as a symbol of impunity. Spanish capital was established under the protection of the dictatorship, and certain conservative figures from its ranks are defending their old friends to return favors.

In the book, you compile various eulogistic statements about General Franco that have been made in recent years by people with, we might say, a certain amount of social influence. They describe him as a great statesman who achieved many achievements for the country and its people. How do you assess these statements?

Historians have shown that they are not true. What happens is that post-Franco individuals and groups claim them to carry out their own political strategy against democracy.

You were one of the first journalists to lift the veil of darkness surrounding the vast fortune of the Franco family and their associates. Have you felt censored because of this?

No. It's true that I've noticed the caution shown by certain editors when I've proposed publishing a book on the subject. However, in the end, I've found brave people who decided it was worth telling the truth.

Is it important for new generations of journalists and historians to continue investigating this issue?

I think so. It's incredible that, 50 years after Franco's death, all the myths created to offer a bucolic and false narrative about the dictatorship and the Caudillo himself are still being upheld. If we remain silent, it will seem that the people who shout the loudest are the ones who are right. And especially at this time, when the far right is using Franco's regime as an excuse to propose its authoritarian model of government lacking rights.

Jayro sanchez is a Spanish journalist