Disturbed
by the clatter of the mill sails in his summer palace of Sanssouci, King Frederick
the Great offered the miller Grävenitz to buy the noisy mill so with the money
he could erect a new one in a different location. The legend goes that having
rejected the offer, the miller was threatened by the King: “Do you know that I
can take the mill away from you by virtue of my royal power without paying one
dime for it” to what the miller replied: “Certainly, His Majesty could do that,
if – by your leave – it were not for the Prussian supreme court in Berlin!”. The
court had ruled against such expropriation. The tale appeared first around 1787
in a French biography of King Frederick the Great that descripted his reign as
one in which everyone, whether miller or king, was equal before the law![1]
We
can congratulate ourselves as citizens of a nation that on April 2013 saw the
same fundamental pillar of the rule of law applied for the first time in Spanish
history: An heir in direct line to the throne was impeached for corruption[2]. Cristina
Federica Victoria Antonia de la Santísima Trinidad de Borbón y Grecia, youngest
daughter of the Kings of Spain, Juan Carlos I and Sofia and since her marriage
with Iñaki Urdangarin Liebaert in 1997, Duchess of Palma de Mallorca, has been
involved in an on-going judicial case against her husband.
The
“Nóos case” also known among the judicial police as “Operation Babel” for the
complex framework of legal entities that appears in the summary judgement[3], is a case of suspected political
corruption perpetrated using the shelter of Instituto Nóos, a non-profit
foundation dedicated to the organization and sponsorship of sport events. Mr. Urdangarin,
along with his ex-partner Diego Torres face charges of embezzlement, fraud,
pervasion of justice, deceit, use of public funds and money laundering for
their activities as president and vice-president of the aforementioned
organization between 2003 and 2006.
To
some extend forced by the seriousness of the events, King Juan Carlos I stated
“Justice is equal to all”[4] in
his 2011 Christmas message to the nation, avoiding specific reference to his
son-in-law, underlying the current application of article 14 of the
Constitution that he once sanctioned on December, 27th 1978.
Spaniards are equal before the law, without any discrimination for reasons of
birth, race, sex, religion, opinion, or any other personal or social condition
or circumstance[5]. No
matter if the person that sits in the dock before the judge has blue blood, is
negative for the “Spanish brand abroad”[6]
or raise thorns in some conservative circles, the reality is that by bringing
potential criminals before courts of justice is the only way to strengthen our
democratic institutions, currently under assault in various fronts. This principle
captured in article 7th of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
find its origins in the Human Declaration of Rights of Man and of Citizen and
is a fundamental pillar of Democracy as we currently understand it. Public
behaviour of political representatives that undermines the independence of
court and judges don´t do Spain any favour.
The
national general commotion with many rough expressions about the affair aired
in all directions by the media intensified after the decision by the Second
Section of the High Court of Palma de Mallorca to withdraw the impeachment of
Princess Cristina in the Nóos case as requested by the Attorney General, Mr
Garcia Revenga and Mr Urdangarin[9].
The court ruled that they did not see “any vehement sign of cooperation” in the
perpetration of the public offenses leaving the door open to other prosecutions
for money laundering or tax fraud what was finally denied by the National
Agency for Tax Administration (AEAT)[10].
It
is now the time for personal reflection on the affair with the great relief of
not having to carry the ink or fountain pen that writes history. My task, informative
and perhaps biased, opinionated and little bit cynic comes to an end raising
one question to myself and that brave reader which has reached this point: Is another mill possible?
[1] Norbert Otto Eke, Die Mühle von Sanssouci, pp. 12-13
[5] Article 14 Spanish Constitution http://noticias.juridicas.com/base_datos/Admin/constitucion.t1.html#a14
