MONTEVIDEO – The Communist Party of Uruguay (PCU) is considering legal action after prosecutors closed part of the investigation into the Social Housing Fund for Construction Workers, known as FOSVOC.

PCU Secretary General Óscar Andrade said the party could pursue claims for damages or defamation. His comments followed the prosecutor’s decision to close the investigation into an alleged financial link between the fraud and the PCU.

Prosecutors investigated whether money taken from FOSVOC had reached the PCU or the construction union SUNCA. However, investigators did not find enough evidence to prove that allegation.

PCU Considers Legal Action

Andrade said the party will analyze possible legal steps after the FOSVOC investigation.

He argued that accusations against the PCU caused political and reputational damage. Therefore, the party could consider a lawsuit involving damages or defamation.

Andrade also expressed disappointment with the direction of the investigation.

He said investigators spent significant time examining allegations involving the PCU and SUNCA. In his view, that focus distracted attention from other aspects of the fraud.

Still, the party has not announced a final decision on legal action.

Prosecutors Close Part of FOSVOC Case

Prosecutor Gilberto Rodríguez closed the investigation into possible transfers of stolen money to the PCU and SUNCA.

Investigators reviewed financial information and other evidence. However, they could not prove that diverted FOSVOC money financed Communist Party activities.

The decision represents an important development in a case that created a major political debate in Uruguay.

Andrade welcomed the lack of evidence against the party. He said the result supported what PCU officials had maintained throughout the investigation.

Fraud Case Did Lead to Convictions

The decision does not mean that no fraud occurred at FOSVOC.

Authorities uncovered a scheme involving money from the housing fund. The investigation eventually resulted in several convictions.

FOSVOC itself had reported the suspected wrongdoing to authorities. SUNCA also expelled people linked to the scheme after the irregularities emerged.

Reports indicate that the wider investigation involved more than US$1 million in fraudulent transactions.

However, prosecutors treated the alleged connection to the PCU as a separate question.

They ultimately found insufficient evidence to establish that connection.

Earlier Claims Put PCU Under Pressure

The controversy began after people involved in the case made claims about possible political financing.

Some statements suggested that diverted money may have supported PCU activities or political campaigns. These claims placed several party and union figures under public scrutiny.

Andrade repeatedly rejected those accusations.

In 2025, he said neither he nor the PCU had participated in the fraudulent scheme. Prosecutors also stated at the time that Andrade did not have the legal status of an accused person.

The investigation continued for months before prosecutors closed this part of the case.

Andrade Criticizes Direction of Investigation

Andrade said the outcome brought mixed feelings.

On one hand, he welcomed the finding that investigators could not prove a financial link to the PCU. On the other hand, he questioned why authorities spent so much time following that line of investigation.

He argued that investigators should have focused more attention on tracing assets connected to those responsible for the fraud.

For Andrade, the case also created lasting damage to the reputation of people and organizations that faced public accusations.

That concern now forms the basis of the PCU’s discussion about possible legal action.

PCU Says Reputation Was Damaged

The PCU FOSVOC case became a major political issue because it involved money intended for construction workers.

FOSVOC helps workers in the construction sector gain access to housing support. SUNCA and construction industry organizations jointly manage the fund.

The PCU has consistently denied receiving money from the fraudulent scheme.

Now, the party must decide whether to take its response into court.

Any lawsuit would open a new chapter in the controversy. It could also shift attention from the original fraud investigation toward the public accusations made during the case.

For now, Andrade says the party will study its options before making a final decision.