
Portuguese police open criminal inquiry into Primeira Liga referee appointments
The Polícia Judiciária launched an investigation into alleged manipulation and privileged information leaks in Portuguese football refereeing following the resignation of refereeing director Duarte Gomes.
Judicial inquiry and evidence dossier
Portugal's Polícia Judiciária and the Central Department of Investigation and Penal Action (DCIAP) opened a formal criminal inquiry into the appointment of referees in the Primeira Liga. The investigation was initiated following the resignation of Duarte Gomes from his role as national technical director of refereeing at the Portuguese Football Federation (FPF). Judicial authorities received a dossier of approximately 20 pages containing material and digital evidence, including WhatsApp conversations, call records, and screenshots indicating that third parties had advance knowledge of match official rosters. The Economic and Financial Crime Combat Unit of the Polícia Judiciária is examining mobile phone records belonging to Luciano Gonçalves, president of the FPF Refereeing Council, and Paulo Lopo, former president of Estrela da Amadora's SAD. Investigators are assessing whether privileged information was systematically shared to influence match assignments during the 2025–2026 domestic season.
- Estrela da Amadora secures Primeira Liga survival with a 2-2 draw against Sporting de Braga
- Polícia Judiciária confirms formal criminal inquiry into referee selections after Duarte Gomes submits evidence dossier
- Full podcast interview with Duarte Gomes scheduled for public release on RTP and Antena 1
Allegations of manipulation and financial inducements
Evidence gathered in the investigation includes communications detailing alleged blackmail and financial incentives aimed at favoring specific clubs. Messages reviewed by investigators reference a potential 1 million euro bonus for a refereeing official tied to specific appointment conditions. Phone records also contain details of external pressure regarding referee selection for a fixture between FC Porto and Benfica during the previous campaign, which concluded in a 0-0 draw. Polícia Judiciária investigators have already questioned Duarte Gomes and referee Hélder Malheiro. During questioning, Malheiro confirmed that Refereeing Council president Luciano Gonçalves promised him an additional season officiating in the Primeira Liga if he made decisions favoring Estrela da Amadora. In a separate audio recording, a referee is heard disclosing his upcoming match assignment to his officiating crew 15 days before the Portuguese Football Federation formally published the official roster.
Gomes explains federation departure
Duarte Gomes addressed his resignation during an appearance on the RTP and Antena 1 podcast Hora Bolas, stating that sports truth had been compromised. In his resignation letter, Gomes cited an illicit strategic advantage provided to Estrela da Amadora, who avoided relegation on the final matchday of the 2025–2026 season with a 2-2 draw against Sporting de Braga, finishing 15th with 30 points. Gomes outlined the evidentiary basis that prompted him to leave the federation structure:
I heard a series of situations with factual and evidentiary proof, and I carried out a series of inquiries to achieve peace of mind and clarity regarding what happened, which I considered of great institutional gravity. After that series of inquiries, not only did I not regain peace of mind, but I deepened my doubts and fears. Faced with this, I made the decision to leave, with evidentiary elements that were more than sufficient for me, regarding conduct with which I do not identify. And if they are illegal, it may be that justice, which has that competence, proves it.
The former referee declined to discuss ongoing case specifics before the full podcast interview airs on Tuesday, citing judicial prudence. Estrela da Amadora has begun the current season with nine points from two wins and three draws, while criminal proceedings continue under DCIAP supervision in Lisbon.
I prefer not to comment on the rest of the current state of affairs at this moment. This is not an escape forward; there will be a moment when I will clarify this. At this point, I will say no more as a matter of judicial prudence. With this, I already give you half an answer.

