Yesterday, Baltasar Garzon, a Spanish judge and well-known human rights activist who previously issued a warrant resulting in the 1998 arrest of Chilean president and alleged human rights violator Augusto Pinochet in London, was acquitted in a 6-1 vote regarding a breach of power. He was accused of violating a 1977 amnesty law by investigating crimes against humanity in his home country that had taken place during the Spanish Civil War and the following fascist dictatorship of Francisco Franco between 1936 and 1975.
While gaining support as "a champion of human rights" from the left, two right-wing groups called Clean Hands and Liberty and Identity accuse Garzon of reopening wounds, which the groups claim that Spaniards, regardless of political beliefs, "had totally recovered from". The main critique of the right is that the 1977 amnesty law was created "to allow Spain to forget the alleged crimes of that era and move on", which Garzon had done the opposite of in 2008 by deciding to begin his investigation, which included the excavation of mass graves. In response to the rights allegations, Garzon says "crimes against humanity should not be subject to an amnesty" and treated separately. However, in an unrelated case still damaging Garzon, he received a suspension of 11 years after being convicted of illegal phonetapping and is currently facing bribery charges.
The civil war saw "the disappearance of tens of thousands of people" while Franco's government continued these atrocities during his reign, which included the oppression of all cultures he did not feel were Spanish. One of the more radical examples of Franco's attempts to create an absolutely united Spain was the prohibition of all languages other than Spanish, which, had it been continued, could have resulted in the complete loss of the Basque language. He also was responsible for many laws aimed at wiping out the cultures of minorities in Spain.
The support from the right reminds me of the absolute denial of the Turkish government regarding the atrocities of Anatolia. As Ronald Suny states, the "Turkish parliament responded witha joint declaration signed by all parties denouncing the French bill" recognizing the genocide as a genocide "as motivated by domestically political concerns and predicting that it would harm...prospects for normalization of relations between" Turkey and Armenia. While Garzon's situation doesn't face the same international problems, the refusal by those politically allied with the regime that had committed the atrocities to revisit or reexamine them is similar. Those being blamed accuse the allegations against them as being politically motivated, but their claims of denial can also be seen in the same light. Although the right claims that Spain has recovered from Franco's dictatorship, Garzon's acquittal saw rejoicing from the victims' relatives, showing that the country has not yet truly recovered.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17176638
While gaining support as "a champion of human rights" from the left, two right-wing groups called Clean Hands and Liberty and Identity accuse Garzon of reopening wounds, which the groups claim that Spaniards, regardless of political beliefs, "had totally recovered from". The main critique of the right is that the 1977 amnesty law was created "to allow Spain to forget the alleged crimes of that era and move on", which Garzon had done the opposite of in 2008 by deciding to begin his investigation, which included the excavation of mass graves. In response to the rights allegations, Garzon says "crimes against humanity should not be subject to an amnesty" and treated separately. However, in an unrelated case still damaging Garzon, he received a suspension of 11 years after being convicted of illegal phonetapping and is currently facing bribery charges.
The civil war saw "the disappearance of tens of thousands of people" while Franco's government continued these atrocities during his reign, which included the oppression of all cultures he did not feel were Spanish. One of the more radical examples of Franco's attempts to create an absolutely united Spain was the prohibition of all languages other than Spanish, which, had it been continued, could have resulted in the complete loss of the Basque language. He also was responsible for many laws aimed at wiping out the cultures of minorities in Spain.
The support from the right reminds me of the absolute denial of the Turkish government regarding the atrocities of Anatolia. As Ronald Suny states, the "Turkish parliament responded witha joint declaration signed by all parties denouncing the French bill" recognizing the genocide as a genocide "as motivated by domestically political concerns and predicting that it would harm...prospects for normalization of relations between" Turkey and Armenia. While Garzon's situation doesn't face the same international problems, the refusal by those politically allied with the regime that had committed the atrocities to revisit or reexamine them is similar. Those being blamed accuse the allegations against them as being politically motivated, but their claims of denial can also be seen in the same light. Although the right claims that Spain has recovered from Franco's dictatorship, Garzon's acquittal saw rejoicing from the victims' relatives, showing that the country has not yet truly recovered.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17176638
I'm glad you chose to post about this topic, Ben, as I feel it has not gotten the international attention that it deserves. Since Franco's regime was known for its violent repression of dissenting voices, I was surprised to learn that Spain had created an amnesty law two years after Franco's death. I was even more surprised when I read in the news about Baltasar Garzon getting in trouble almost 40 years later for investigating crimes from Franco's reign. After all, surely human rights violations aren't something that can or should be brushed aside, no matter how much time has passed.
ReplyDeleteYour connection between Spain's denial of past human rights abuses and Turkey's denial of genocide is intriguing. Although Spain's amnesty law isn't on the same level as Turkey's denial of the intentional murder of some one million people, it does point to a common problem among governments: the desire to cover up uncomfortable or unacceptable actions (or "blemishes," in Suny's words) made in the past, even if it was by a previous government.
These coverups often occur through amnesty laws, not only in Spain, but also in places like Morocco, where a recent Truth and Reconciliation Committee permitted victims of the previous king's violent reign to come forth and receive compensation, but only if they promised to never bring their case to trial.
There is a danger in attempting to "get over the past" or "let bygones be bygones" too quickly. Amnesty laws such as these turn the justice system into a farce. Moreover, they force a country to heal before it's ready—which, rather than reopening old wounds, only encourages them to fester. Simply because the alleged persecutor has died and can no longer be prosecuted does not mean that a nation should shy away from an investigation of the past. Instead, the nation continues to hold a debt to tell the truth—a debt made not only to the victim and the victim's family, but also to the nation's historical memory.