This concerns an African nation: the public prosecutor's office dismisses a sensational complaint against Barcelona

The Democratic Republic of the Congo's sponsorship of Barcelona has sparked major controversy since the details emerged.

Worth 44 million euros over four seasons, the deal prompted a formal complaint that questioned both the procedures behind the agreement and the source of the money funding it.

Those behind the complaint focused on one possibility: that public money had financed the contract without a prior tender or the approval of the Congolese parliament.

Sport newspaper reported that the public prosecutor's office opened a preliminary investigation to examine the facts, but the case never advanced through the Spanish judicial process.

Prosecutors chose to shelve the complaint, reasoning that the facts did not take place in Spain and that they therefore lack the territorial jurisdiction to investigate, according to Albert Lemos on Cadena SER radio.

The complaint followed Barcelona's announcement of its partnership with the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Prosecutors opened a preliminary investigation at first, but then decided against pursuing it over that question of territorial jurisdiction.

Back in July 2025, Barcelona had announced the partnership with the Congolese government to promote the African state through sport and culture.

Among the terms, the slogan "Democratic Republic of the Congo, Heart of Africa" would appear on the back of the training shirts worn by the club's professional teams, alongside other promotional activities.

Four seasons, 44 million euros. The sheer size of the deal, coupled with suspicion that public funds had been used without the necessary procedures, sat at the heart of the complaint.

Shelving the complaint brings an end to the preliminary investigations opened in Spain into Congo's sponsorship of Barcelona. The decision closes off this judicial track, yet it does nothing to settle the questions that have followed the agreement since it came to light.

Prosecutors never assessed whether any irregularities tainted the signing of the contract. They simply ruled that the facts fall outside their territorial jurisdiction.

For now, the 44 million euro agreement still raises questions over the terms under which it was negotiated and the use of public funds to finance it.