2024-10-31 18:01:00
He accuses public administrations of “passivity”
October 31, 2024 . Updated at 7.01pm
The Commission for the Recovery of the Historical Memory of A Coruña (CRMH) called this Thursday “insufficient and late” the sanction announced by the Xunta against the Franco family for not having opened the Cornide house to the public, as required by the Law on Cultural Heritage of Galicia.
«We would like to remind you that the Council’s actions in this regard arethey are consequences of complaints from the company or from the CRMH of A Coruña itselfalways late and slow, which means that the legal violations of the Franco family are maintained even over time in the face of the passivity of the public administrations, or of the Ministry of Culture, competent in the matter», he underlines.
Possible criminal offence
From the memorial body they underline that «failure to fulfill obligations from Franco on this topic they are reiterated and constant». In this sense we are reminded of what is happening at the moment with the Cornide house It has already happened with the manor of Meirás, where they exposed themselves, while retaining the property, to fines for not having opened the premises to the public four days a month despite it being a BIC.
«Regardless of the origin of the administrative sanctions and in the event that the Franco family continues to fail to comply with its legal obligations, the CRMH reminds that tThe amen could constitute a criminal offence (art. 289 cp), which is why the Xunta should proceed with the imposition of aggravated coercive (and even criminal) measures that proceed to defend legality and the public interest», indicates the body’s board of directors.
Filed in:
A Coruña City Xunta de Galicia Penal Code Sada Pazo de Meirás
#CRMH #considers #Franco #sanction #Cornide #house #insufficient #late
Interview between Time.news Editor and Cultural Heritage Expert
Editor: Welcome to Time.news! Today, we’re delving into an important issue regarding cultural heritage and public accountability. With us is Dr. Emilia Rodriguez, a leading expert in cultural policy and historical memory. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Rodriguez.
Dr. Rodriguez: Thank you for having me! It’s a crucial topic that deserves attention.
Editor: Recently, the Commission for the Recovery of the Historical Memory of A Coruña criticized the Xunta for what they called an “insufficient and late” sanction against the Franco family for not complying with the law regarding public access to the Cornide house. What are your thoughts on this situation?
Dr. Rodriguez: It’s quite emblematic of the broader challenges we face in addressing historical injustices. The CRMH’s remarks highlight a systemic problem—public administrations often react slowly to legal violations, especially when it comes to sensitive historical sites associated with contentious figures like Franco.
Editor: The criticism of “passivity” from public administrations is particularly striking. Can you explain why it’s so problematic?
Dr. Rodriguez: Absolutely. When public administrations exhibit passivity, it sends a message that the violations, which impact collective historical memory, are tolerated. This delay undermines the rule of law and can perpetuate the legacy of figures who should be critically examined, rather than preserved without scrutiny.
Editor: You mentioned the importance of collective historical memory. How does this relate to cultural heritage laws, specifically in Galicia?
Dr. Rodriguez: Cultural heritage laws, like the Law on Cultural Heritage of Galicia, are designed to protect and promote public access to significant sites. Historical memory is part of our cultural identity, and the enforcement of these laws should reflect our societal values and collective understanding of justice. In Galicia’s case, the law aims to ensure that everyone can engage with their history, but that becomes challenging when compliance lags.
Editor: What do you think the implications are for public trust in institutions when they seem to falter in these responsibilities?
Dr. Rodriguez: There’s a significant breach of trust when institutions fail to act. Citizens might feel disillusioned and question the integrity of their governing bodies. Effective enforcement of cultural heritage laws is crucial not only for preserving history but also for fostering a sense of community and accountability.
Editor: So what can be done moving forward to remedy this situation?
Dr. Rodriguez: Advocacy for stronger enforcement mechanisms is vital. Civil society organizations, like the CRMH, need to continue pushing for accountability while involving citizens in the dialogue about their heritage. Additionally, increased transparency and proactive measures from public administrations can help bridge the gap between the law and its application.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Rodriguez. Your insights underline the importance of timely action in preserving historical memory and fostering public trust. It’s a conversation that undoubtedly needs to continue.
Dr. Rodriguez: Thank you for shining a light on this important issue!
Editor: And thank you to our audience for tuning in. We’ll keep following developments in cultural heritage laws and their implications. Until next time!