Pedro Marco de la Peña, the head of Adif, has publicly disagreed with the recent Civil Guard report concerning the railway incident in Adamuz. The president rejected the inferences suggesting a possible rail fracture, allegedly identified 22 hours before the event. According to Marco de la Peña, the police document contains erroneous interpretations of the prevention mechanisms implemented in the railway infrastructure. This statement follows the submission by the Organic Unit of the Judicial Police of the Civil Guard of Córdoba to the Montoro Court of a detailed analysis of the technical circumstances surrounding the tragedy.

On January 18, 46 people lost their lives in Adamuz, Córdoba, following a collision between an Iryo train and a Renfe Alvia. Preliminary investigations suggest that a rail break was the primary cause of the initial derailment of the Iryo convoy, which subsequently collided with the Alvia train traveling in the opposite direction. The Civil Guard report details that Adif's monitoring systems recorded a voltage drop on January 17 at 9:46 PM, nearly 22 hours before the fatal accident. Investigators believe this electrical anomaly was consistent with a track break, although it did not reach the threshold required to activate automatic alarms.

During his public appearance, Marco de la Peña emphasized that track circuits are not a reliable method for immediate detection of rail breaks. He argued that this limitation is globally recognized in the railway sector and does not represent a specific deficiency in Spanish management. The controversy centers on the configuration of automatic alert systems on the Madrid-Andalucía high-speed line. The Civil Guard maintains that the voltage drop, although below the alarm threshold, persisted for an extended period, which should have prompted a preventive inspection. However, Marco de la Peña has refuted this interpretation, explaining that the system is not designed to automatically alert on such signals due to their unreliability as indicators of rail breakage.

The Adif president described the investigation report as "very complete" but stressed the "complexity" of the technical context of these monitoring systems, which requires specialized knowledge for correct interpretation. He insisted that the idea that Adif was obliged to detect the rail break instantly "is not correct" according to international railway sector standards. The Civil Guard's reconstruction of events indicates that 21 hours and 57 minutes elapsed between the electrical alteration and the accident, during which multiple trains passed without any inspection protocol or traffic restriction being activated.