Back to home
Politics·

Opposition group led by Carine Montaner contests government's refusal to disclose beneficiaries, amounts,

and terms of public-backed Covid-era soft loans, citing citizens' right to transparency.

Synthesized from:
Diari d'AndorraBon DiaAltaveu

Key Points

  • Andorra Endavant seeks list of beneficiary companies, loan amounts, and guarantee conditions withheld by government.
  • Soft loans backed by public guarantees to aid businesses during Covid.
  • Appeal under article 95 of Qualified Law on Constitutional Court within 15 days.
  • Case tests transparency of public funds and democratic standards in Andorra.

The Andorra Endavant parliamentary group, led by Carine Montaner, will challenge the government's refusal to disclose details of Covid-era soft loans before the Constitutional Court.

The move follows an unsatisfactory reply from the Finance Ministry on 12 January 2026 to the group's request for protection filed with the syndicus general. Andorra Endavant sought a list of beneficiary companies, the amounts granted, and the guarantee conditions for these public-backed funds—information the executive has withheld despite their reliance on public resources.

In a statement, the group emphasised that the soft loans, aimed at helping businesses weather the pandemic, represent public guarantees funded by citizens and capable of affecting current and future state finances. They argued these details cannot be treated as a private matter between the government and recipients.

Relying on article 95 of the Qualified Law on the Constitutional Court, Andorra Endavant plans to file an appeal and request for constitutional protection within the 15-day limit. The action aims to restore citizens' right to information and test the legality of keeping beneficiary names, loan sums, and terms secret.

The group framed the case as a test of Andorra's democratic standards, tasking the court with determining whether the public has a right to know how these government-endorsed funds were distributed or if the executive's secrecy aligns with the law. They positioned the dispute as transcending party politics, rooted instead in the fundamental principle of transparency over public money that belongs to citizens.

Share the article via