Andorra Court Hears Tobacco Smuggling Trial Against Lauredià Group

Andorra's Criminal Court continued hearings on Wednesday in the Operació Lliri trial, where five men face charges of tobacco smuggling, money laundering, and related offences tied to a Lauredià-based transport and commerce group.

The case centres on activities from June to October 2017, uncovered after a Spanish police operation led to months of Andorran surveillance and arrests in February 2018. Prosecutors allege an organised network involving bulk tobacco purchases, transport to garages in Santa Coloma and Escaldes using vehicles with hidden double floors, border watches, and financial flows to conceal profits. The main defendant faces six years and six months in prison, a €2.6 million fine, and forfeiture of nearly €1.94 million in assets, for a total claim exceeding €4.5 million. Charges include continued smuggling, habitual money laundering, criminal association, vehicle alterations, and repeated computer data tampering. The other four face mainly suspended sentences and fines up to €200,000.

All defendants who appeared denied forming a criminal association, admitting isolated tasks like transports or vehicle loans but claiming ignorance of the tobacco's illicit destination or final buyers. The main suspect insisted he sold tobacco legally during business hours with receipts, saying he only sought to make a living and could guess some buyers' intentions but rejected organised crime involvement.

Two brothers, aged 29 and another unspecified, blamed coercion by their father—the alleged ringleader, now missing since 2018. The younger said he was jobless and financially dependent in 2017, collecting boxes from tobacco shops and delivering them to garages in his or his father's car under threats of eviction or beatings. "I never loaded a box of tobacco, I just transported and unloaded it," he stated, acknowledging related calls but denying sales knowledge. His brother gave a similar account, suspecting the tobacco's purpose from family history but insisting he followed orders without joining any structure. "My father forced me," the younger added.

A fifth defendant, owner of loaned vehicles, said he provided them due to seizure burdens and denied knowing of modifications or illicit use. "If I'd known, I wouldn't have given those vehicles," he said. Prior statements from the absent defendant and a deceased uncle cited economic need for similar trips.

Tuesday opened with defence arguments against trying one absent defendant in absentia, claiming insufficient notice and defence rights violations. Prosecutors countered the absence was deliberate; the court rejected suspension after exhausting summons attempts.

Hearings, which began Tuesday, continue Thursday with expert and documentary evidence.