Corrupted Pigs is now CPigs

Portugal is a small country.

But apparently, it has enough room to sustain a remarkably diverse ecosystem of pigs.

Over the past decades, politicians, bankers, businesspeople, public managers, mayors, intermediaries and officials have appeared in investigations involving corruption, fraud, money laundering, abuse of power, influence peddling and other forms of economic and financial crime.

Some were convicted.

Others were acquitted.

Some cases were dismissed.

Others became time-barred.

And some have been going on for so many years that they could probably apply for a residence permit by now.

This article is not a catalogue of culprits.

It is a catalogue of cases, mechanisms and consequences.

Because there is a fundamental difference between a suspect and a convicted person.

Being a defendant does not mean being convicted.
Being indicted does not mean being guilty.
Suspicion is not proof.
And a first-instance conviction can be changed on appeal.

But there is another question worth asking:

when justice is over, who pays the bill?

BPN

The bank that was left for all of us

Banco Português de Negócios became one of Portugal's greatest symbols of economic and financial crime.

The bank was nationalised in 2008 after enormous losses and irregularities came to light.

José Oliveira e Costa, former Secretary of State for Tax Affairs and chairman of BPN, was eventually convicted of several crimes, including aggravated fraud, forgery, tax fraud and money laundering.

But the story does not end with one person's conviction.

The State created entities such as Parvalorem to manage the troubled assets transferred from the BPN universe.

Translated into CPigs language:

the pigs may change pigsties.
The bill still arrives at the table.

The BPN case therefore became a particularly clear example of a question running throughout this article:

where does criminal responsibility end and the collective bill begin?

BPP

When the bank goes down too

Banco Privado Português was another major Portuguese financial collapse.

João Rendeiro, founder and chairman of BPP, was convicted in different cases of crimes including breach of trust, aggravated tax fraud, money laundering and forgery.

He eventually fled abroad and was later arrested in South Africa.

The case revealed another recurring feature of financial crime:

money crosses borders much faster than court proceedings do.

And by the time a sentence finally arrives, there may be very little left to recover.

FACE OCULTA

When influence stops being a theory

In 2008, the investigation that became known as Operation Face Oculta began.

The case investigated a network of relationships involving businessmen, managers and figures connected to public and private companies.

At its centre was Manuel Godinho and his business group.

Among the best-known names were Armando Vara and José Penedos.

The case went to trial with 36 defendants: 34 individuals and two companies.

At first instance, all were convicted. Eleven people received effective prison sentences.

Manuel Godinho was initially sentenced to 17 years and six months.

Armando Vara received five years.

José Penedos received five years.

On appeal, some sentences and legal classifications were changed. Godinho's sentence was reduced to 15 years and 10 months and Penedos's to three years and three months. Vara's five-year sentence remained unchanged.

In other words:

Face Oculta was not merely a story of suspicion. There were judicial convictions.

But it is also a good reminder that:

first instance does not necessarily mean final decision.

It is one of the Portuguese cases in which the word "influence" stops being an abstraction.

Because there is one thing money can buy.

And another thing money can buy even better:

access.

OPERATION FURACÃO

Follow the money

Operation Furacão investigated, for years, schemes involving tax fraud, money laundering and the use of offshore structures.

According to the Public Prosecutor's Office, hundreds of investigations were opened and hundreds of defendants were involved.

The operation ultimately produced hundreds of procedural outcomes and enabled significant amounts to be recovered for the State through payments and settlements.

The case matters for a simple reason:

not all economic crime comes with a politician receiving an envelope.

Sometimes it looks like:

an invoice.
A company.
An offshore account.
A bank account.
An intermediary.

Then another account.

Another company.

Another offshore structure.

Money does not necessarily have to disappear.

Sometimes it just needs to travel.

MONTE BRANCO

Money likes mountains

Operation Monte Branco focused on complex structures for moving money and suspected tax fraud and money laundering.

The investigation eventually intersected with other major Portuguese cases, including Operation Marquês.

Here, the main character is not necessarily the bribe.

It is opacity.

The more layers there are between money and its true beneficiary, the harder it becomes to answer a seemingly simple question:

whose money is this?

In the financial world, apparently, even money can have a decentralised identity.

Just without a blockchain to catch it.

GOLDEN VISAS

Access for sale

In 2014, Operation Labyrinth targeted Portugal's Golden Visa programme.

Several people were arrested, including senior officials linked to the Immigration and Borders Service and the Institute of Registries and Notaries.

The investigation concerned suspected corruption connected to the granting of residence permits to foreign investors.

The case raised a particularly uncomfortable question:

when the State turns an administrative decision into a valuable asset, who controls those controlling access?

Because corruption is not only about money.

It is also about what money can buy.

A licence.

A contract.

A decision.

An open door.

BES / GES

Too big to feel real

The collapse of Banco Espírito Santo and Grupo Espírito Santo was much more than the failure of a bank.

It was the collapse of one of Portugal's largest business groups.

It was followed by criminal investigations, court proceedings, a parliamentary inquiry and a huge dispute over responsibility, losses and assets.

Ricardo Salgado became the central figure in several of these proceedings.

But the BES/GES case also shows something important:

financial crime, mismanagement, fraud and corruption are not synonyms.

A system can generate enormous losses without every euro lost automatically corresponding to a corruption offence.

And that is precisely why we need to look at the whole system.

OPERATION MARQUÊS

The case that became a unit of time

Operation Marquês began in 2013.

In 2014, José Sócrates was arrested.

In 2017, the Public Prosecutor's Office presented an indictment running into thousands of pages against 28 defendants, alleging several crimes, including corruption, money laundering and tax fraud.

The investigation phase substantially changed the original case.

The proceedings then moved to trial, where José Sócrates is facing 22 charges.

And it continues.

More than a decade after the investigation began.

The case has almost become a Portuguese unit of measurement:

"How long?"

"Since Marquês."

It is also one of the clearest examples of the tension between criminal investigation, the presumption of innocence, appeals, limitation periods and the duration of justice.

Here, the fundamental principle remains:

an indictment is not a conviction.

TUTTI-FRUTTI

Political fruit

In 2025, the Public Prosecutor's Office indicted 60 defendants in Operation Tutti-Frutti.

The investigation involves alleged crimes including active and passive corruption, aggravated corruption, money laundering, malfeasance, influence peddling, document forgery and fraud.

Figures from different political parties and structures were involved.

Fernando Medina was made a defendant but was not indicted in the case.

That distinction matters.

Because in Portugal, apparently, even fruit comes in different procedural states:

defendant.
indicted.
convicted.
acquitted.
time-barred.

They are not the same thing.

SUBMARINES

The pigs were there. They just weren't all in Portugal.

The purchase of Portuguese submarines became one of the country's major corruption-suspicion cases involving defence contracts.

In Germany, Ferrostaal executives were convicted of bribing foreign officials in connection with international business, including submarine sales to Portugal.

In Portugal, proceedings related to the suspicions did not result in equivalent criminal convictions of the Portuguese figures involved in the political dimension of the case.

And that difference is precisely what makes the case interesting.

Not because it proves that "everyone was guilty".

But because it demonstrates that the same business transaction can produce very different judicial consequences depending on the country, the evidence and the proceedings.

The CPigs question is simple:

if there is corruption at one end of the chain, where does the chain end?

PARVALOREM

The pit is also public property

After BPN, troubled assets remained.

Public structures such as Parvalorem were created to manage them.

The result is a kind of financial archaeology:

difficult-to-collect debts, devalued assets, legal proceedings, losses and successive attempts to recover whatever can still be recovered.

This is where the word "corruption" starts to become insufficient.

Because part of the problem is no longer:

"Who stole?"

It is:

"How much did we lose?"

"How much did we recover?"

"Who got the assets?"

"Who assumed the risk?"

"Who paid the bill?"

And, above all:

"What prevents it from happening again?"

WHEN THE POLICE END UP ON THE OTHER SIDE

Operation Safra Justa

In 2025, Operation Safra Justa led to the arrest of GNR officers and a PSP officer over alleged involvement in human trafficking and exploitation in the Alentejo.

This is not a classic political corruption case.

It is more uncomfortable than that.

Because it involves people entrusted precisely with preventing and combating certain crimes.

When oversight mechanisms fail, the problem is no longer simply inside the system.

It can reach those who are supposed to police the system.

And then the question stops being:

"Who watches the pigs?"

It becomes:

"Who watches the watchers?"

THE SMALL SCHEMES

Corruption also fits inside a local council

In Lisbon, the DIAP investigated dozens of cases involving suspicious applications for proof-of-residence certificates.

According to reports, suspicious situations had been identified in a large proportion of the city's parish councils.

This kind of case matters because it destroys a comfortable idea:

corruption does not only happen in grand offices.

It can happen at a counter.

In a document.

Through a favour.

A contact.

A "I know someone".

A "take care of this".

A "nobody will check".

A large scheme can begin with a small exception.

And when a small exception becomes normal, it stops looking like corruption.

It starts looking like:

"the way things work."

That may be the most dangerous pig of all.

you don't give the key to the safe to the person who gets paid to open it.

MEGA POULTRY FARMS

When development grows faster than trust

The expansion of large poultry operations, including major projects in the city Leiria, has generated local opposition and criticism concerning licensing, environmental impacts and decision-making processes.

Here, facts, administrative decisions and allegations of manipulation or corruption must be carefully separated.

But the democratic question is legitimate:

when a decision with enormous economic and environmental impact is made, who participated in it?

Who had access?

Who decided?

What information was available?

What alternatives were considered?

And who oversees those who decided?

Not every conflict between a community and a large company is corruption.

But every conflict of this kind deserves enough transparency for corruption, if it exists, to be detected.

WHEN NOTHING HAPPENS

And what happens when a case is dismissed?

One of the most important questions about corruption in Portugal is not:

"How many cases are there?"

It is:

"What happens after they are reported?"

Investigations can be dismissed.

Indictments can end in acquittals.

Convictions can be changed on appeal.

Cases can become time-barred.

And some may simply fail to produce enough evidence to support an indictment.

That does not mean that "the justice system protects corrupt people".

But it does mean that the number of investigations opened is not the number of convictions.

And that is precisely why data on dismissed cases, limitation periods, duration of proceedings, appeals and asset recovery matters.

Without that data, we are left with two equally dangerous narratives:

"Portugal is full of corrupt people."

or

"Portugal has no corruption."

Reality is probably much less comfortable.

And much harder to measure.

CORRUPTION IS NOT ONLY AT THE TOP

The pot is big. So are the paws.

International studies attempt to measure people's participation in corrupt practices and corrupt behaviour.

The frequently cited figure that around one in four people may have participated in such behaviour should, however, be treated with caution: it depends on the definition used, the sample and the methodology.

The fundamental idea remains.

Corruption is not exclusively an elite phenomenon.

There is an everyday dimension:

the favour.
The bribe.
The contact.
The connection.
The exception.
The small fraud.
The false document.
The silence.

The difference between a small scheme and a large scheme may simply be the amount of money involved and the number of people participating.

Or the size of the pot.

SO, WHO IS THE PIG?

The uncomfortable question

It is tempting to look for one person.

A politician.

A banker.

A businessperson.

An official.

A corrupt individual.

It is simpler.

It is also more entertaining.

But it is insufficient.

Because Portugal's major cases repeatedly show one thing:

the problem is not only who breaks the rules.

It is also:

• who makes the rules;

• who applies them;

• who oversees them;

• who has access to information;

• who controls the money;

• who decides;

• who investigates;

• who prosecutes;

• who judges;

• who appeals;

• who waits;

• who pays.

It is an ecosystem.

And an ecosystem can produce corrupt behaviour even when no single component appears responsible for everything.

THE PIGSTY

This may be the least funny part.

Corruption is not only lost money.

It is lost trust.

When people believe that a public decision can be bought, they stop trusting the decision.

When they believe that certain crimes never have consequences, they stop trusting justice.

When they believe that the right friends always have access to the right people, they stop trusting equality.

When they believe that the State socialises losses while privatising gains, they stop trusting the social contract itself.

And when trust disappears, people start looking for shortcuts.

That is how a small scheme becomes culture.

And how culture can become a system.

TRANSPARENCY IS NOT DECORATION

The answer cannot simply be:

"Catch the corrupt."

That is necessary.

But it is not enough.

We need systems capable of making visible:

decisions,
contracts,
financial flows,
conflicts of interest,
beneficial owners,
proceedings,
outcomes,
and consequences.

The more important a public decision is, the more auditable it should be.

The more money is involved, the greater the traceability should be.

The greater the delegated power, the greater the capacity for scrutiny should be.

And the greater the distance between those who decide and those who pay, the greater the need for transparency.

FROM THE PIGSTY TO THE BLOCKCHAIN

This is where the conversation stops being only about corruption.

Technology does not eliminate corruption.

Blockchain does not eliminate corruption.

Artificial intelligence does not eliminate corruption.

No technology can replace accountable institutions, attentive citizens or independent justice.

But technologies for transparency, auditability, identity, traceability and participation can reduce areas of opacity.

They can make decisions verifiable.

They can create auditable records.

They can distribute the capacity for scrutiny.

They can bring decision-makers closer to those affected by their decisions.

And they can make it harder to rewrite history after it has happened.

The goal is not to create a system where nobody can ever screw things up.

That would be asking too much of the human species.

The goal is to create systems where it is harder to screw things up without leaving a trace.

THE BILL

In the end, perhaps this is the most important question.

Not:

"Who is the biggest pig?"

But:

"How much did it cost?"

How much money disappeared?

How much was recovered?

How long did it take?

How many cases were dismissed?

How many became time-barred?

How many convictions survived?

How many decisions were changed?

What political consequences followed?

What administrative consequences followed?

And, above all:

who paid?

Because public money is not nobody's money.

It is everyone's money.

Corrupted Pigs is now CPigs

The cases change.

The names change.

The parties change.

The companies change.

The laws change.

But some patterns keep coming back.

Money.
Access.
Power.
Opacity.
Influence.
Oversight.
Impunity.
Consequences.

That is why studying corruption should not merely be about finding pigs.

It should be about understanding the pigsty.

Because identifying a pig after the feast is relatively easy.

The real challenge is discovering who opened the door, who brought the bucket, who stopped watching — and who got stuck with the bill.

CPigs — Not by the Hair of My Chinny-chin-chin

Our Socials

Join our community or directly ask any question, we are happy to clarify

Book a call?

2026. All rights reserved. ThEndorSemenT is a non-profit initiative and does not constitute an investment vehicle or financial service under applicable regulations

parent organization

NEWSLETTER

IMPACT

Transparent systems that empower informed participation and shared responsibility

Institutional Support

Technology Partners

4 Incubated projects
1 Endorsed brand
€30K Funding secured

Transparency is the way