5 MARCH → 11 JUNE → 19 AUGUST 2026
Outgoing 699645/2026 must be read with 184368/2026 and 497011/2026. The safe institutional conclusion is narrow: the General Comptroller will not open an all-encompassing audit at a third party’s request and says it does not fiscalise the RIC suitability declaration. It reached no merits conclusion on the remaining funding sources and did not clear any person, entity or public body.
The Office delimited its functions and recorded activation of the internal integrity route for the communication received, subject to confidentiality. That was not a general audit or a determination of the truth of every reported fact.
It identified the RIC lane: competent Finance body, prior binding AEAT report and Canary Government decision. It said RIC suitability is not itself a Canary autonomous subsidy or direct regional-treasury disbursement and transferred the material to the competent Vice-Ministry.
It declined an all-encompassing audit or certificate at a third party’s request and expressly clarified that June was not a general certificate that no other aid, regional incentive, European funding, payment, certification or file existed.
It is inaccurate to say the General Comptroller confirmed that “there was no public funding”. What it confirmed is only that a RIC suitability declaration is not, by itself, an autonomous subsidy or direct Canary treasury payment and that the Office does not participate in fiscalising it.
The August letter says the June reply cannot be used as a general nonexistence certificate for other aid, subsidies, regional incentives, European or ERDF funding, payments, certifications or separate files.
Result: questions concerning GC/836/P06, ERDF, payments, employment, Series F/G, other support and possible overlap remain open and must be resolved through native files. This does not prove that any such instrument existed, was paid or was irregular.
| Question | Status after 699645/2026 | Document capable of closing it |
|---|---|---|
| What did the RIC file, AEAT report and Decree 224/2022 cover? | Not resolved by the Comptroller. | File 02/2022, application, memorandum, report, proposal, decree, annexes and amendments. |
| What did Series F and G finance? | Unresolved. | Agreements, drawdowns, bank records, invoices, works certificates, liabilities and payroll. |
| Did GC/836/P06, ERDF or other aid exist or pay out? | No general nonexistence certificate exists. | Grant/managing files, ERDF operation, certifications, payments, controls and closure. |
| Was there overlap in costs, assets, value or employment? | Not verified. | Consolidated source-and-use and invoice, property and employment tables. |
| What followed the June referral? | Traceability pending. | Receiving entry, unit, file, status and reasoned response. |
The letter argues that complainant or third-party status does not by itself confer access to a possible financial-control file and invokes reservation and confidentiality. This page records that institutional position; it does not present it as a universal court ruling on transparency, whistleblower protection, criminal procedure or other sector-specific rights.
SIINF is for objective indications connected with the activity or functioning of Canary autonomous-administration bodies. It does not replace access requests concerning RIC, regional incentives, ERDF, tax, local or judicial files.
This update is based on the text of outgoing 699645/2026 supplied on 20 August 2026 and the two earlier communications recovered from email. The native signed August PDF remains necessary for primary custody and hashing.
The public repository retains a redacted institutional derivative. The unredacted full text and native binary belong in a private, access-controlled evidence layer—not on a public page containing personal data.