crimes committed by totalitarian regimes - Ministrstvo za pravosodje

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Crimes committed by totalitarian regimes excluded. The first of these were the pensions for the mutilated who were not considered “Gentlemen mutilated for the defence of the motherland” (1976). This definition of subjects was insufficient and later on pensions were explicitly recognised for mutilated ex-Republican fighters (1982). In 1984, the services and rights to pensions of Republican servicemen (army, police, etc.) were recognised as well the entitlements deriving from these. Then, it came the recognition of pensions, health care and social assistance for widows and children of people death during the Civil War (1978). This law did not target specifically any of the sides and it had a generalist character. The most complete measure so far was the provision for a state compensation for those imprisoned because of any of the situations foreseen in the 1977 law (in 1990). The striking thing is that the law which created those entitlements was hidden within the Accompanying Law to the General Budget Law (a kind of umbrella law which was historically used in Spain for approving pending issues not strictly linked to the budget). As for the symbolic dimension, there was no official line and the politics was that of a nonofficial memory. In 1981, the Law on the National Coat of Arms and the decree that developed it obliged to remove the Francoist coat of arms from public buildings and offices in three years. The central administration accomplished the removal of dictatorship signs relatively soon (even though some remained). In parallel, some local councils and autonomous communities were particularly active in removing symbols of the dictatorship, such as statues, plaques, street names, etc. As a paradigmatic case, the birth town of the dictator, Ferrol, had eliminated in 1979 the reference to the Caudillo from its name (the town was called Ferrol del Caudillo). These interventions were very important since the largest amount of symbolic elements had a local dimension. In 1996, the Spanish Parliament recognised the role of the International Brigades (foreign volunteers who enlisted to fight in favour of the Republic), granting them Spanish nationality 1 and organising a public homage in the seat of the Congress. However, according to Aguilar, there was only a monument dedicated to the reconciliation of both sides, and it was inaugurated in 1985 after recycling a former one of 1840 which honour Spanish combatants against French invaders in 1808. 3. The change of environment In 2002, the Spanish Parliament approved unanimously the condemnation of the Franco Regime. Facing increasing pressures, the PP conservative government agreed to support the initiative as a mechanism for closing any additional claims. Several sectors of civil society did not consider these measures sufficient and the pressure increased for more comprehensive one. When the socialist party won the 2004 elections, it created a Commission for the Study of the subject and the drafting of a law on the issue became a distinctive objective for the legislative term. Several factors influenced this turn towards a more comprehensive approach. – The demonstration effect from other cases, such as the Latin American process, mainly Argentina and Chile. The paradigmatic case of South Africa which has influenced processes elsewhere does not seem to be widely known by Spanish actors and its influence does not seem to be highly relevant in a direct form. In all these case, the creation of Commissions for Truth was a central element and, as it has been already mentioned, in Spain there was never been an “official” process of fact finding and truth. Rather than anything else, this absence was perceived by some as an attempt to silence certain citizens or, even worse, to hide truth. – Additionally, there was a more positive international climate on the issue, with the creation of ad hoc tribunals for war crimes in the ex-Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Moreover, in 2006, a Report of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe denounced the grave violations of human rights committed in Spain between 1936 and 1975.The Resolution recommended, among other things, the creation of a Commission of Truth. – The affirmation of the principle of universal jurisdiction led Spanish judges to become involved in similar processes in Latin America, in cases such as Chile (with the attempt to process General Pinochet), Argentina or Guatemala (with additional demands pending on cases such as Tibet and 1 Royal Decree 39/1996 19 January 1996. 192
Crimes committed by totalitarian regimes Congo). There was obviously an inconsistency of Spanish legislation and, worse, the pending threat that at a certain point victims of Spanish dictatorship would seek redress in Spanish justice. – The pressure of civil society. Facing the silence of the authorities and equipped with the know how derived from international experiences, a large number of civil society NGOs became active in the field. Their objectives were very varied and, among these, the Asociación para la Recuperación de la Memoria Histórica (Association for the Recovery of the Historical Memory) became one of the most representatives. These NGOs could also frame their demands on the orthodox language of transitional justice, claiming knowledge of truth and recognition. 2 – Finally, the growing importance of the Victims of Terrorism in Spain provided a conceptual context in which society and law makers were more receptive to the claims of these collectives. The assumption of the basic dignity of all victims immediately led to a revaluation of the victims of the Civil War and dictatorship. – A generational factor. Last but not least, the change in political leadership had some influence. Many of these leaders were third generation from civil war actors and felt a sense of detachment with the inherent risks which the transition generation could have seen in an extended process of transitional justice. Additionally, the advanced age of the remaining directly involved persons required addressing the issue as soon as possible if direct victims were to see the results. 4. The 2007 Law on recognition of rights and measures for those who suffered persecution or violence during the civil war and the dictatorship The more positive environment did not mean that the measures proposed by the Socialist government did find widespread acceptance. To start with, the main opposition party, the Conservative PP, strongly opposed the law, with its leader claiming that he would propose its derogation when he won the elections. 3 These views against were also largely shared by conservative sectors, media and intellectuals, 4 who saw in the law an attempt to break the spirit of transition or an attempt to re-write history. Even sectors close to the socialist (and even senior figures within the parties) had second thought on the initiative. For instance, the leading Spanish newspaper El País, closely associated with PSOE and with the generation of the transition, argued that many of the law’s objectives could be achieved through other means. 5 Being the PSOE a minority government, it had to rely on support from a number of other small parties, all of which wanted to see specific issues reflected in the law. The problem for crafting a consensus was that the most radical ones (and firmest supporters of the government) wanted measures that clashed strongly with the most moderate views, whose participation would be required to secure the legitimacy that a broad consensus would provide. 6 The whole process was followed with a large debate in the media (mainly press) and prompted passionate reactions. One of the most symbolic ones was the ‘war of pass away announcements’, in which families of death persons rivalled in blaming opposed bands for the killings. Although the official name of the law was Law by which rights are recognised and extended and measures are established in favour of those who suffered persecution or violence during the civil war and the dictatorship, it became commonly known and referred to as the Law on Historical Memory, to the point that even government members used this designation. This shows the capability of some NGOs and public opinion leaders to capture the conceptual stage and win the meaning battle. 2 Survivors did not claim revenge but recognition. See, for instance, the report of American journalist Victoria Burnett on Spanish repressed communist Marcos Ana Bill in “Spanish parliament aims to end ‘Amnesia’ about civil war victims”, The New York Times, October 27 2007. See also Joaquim Sempere, “Memoria histórica y consolidación democrática”, El País, 31 January 2007. 3 Nevertheless, the PP voted in the parliamentary commission almost 1/3 of the proposed articles. 4 See, for instance, Miguel Herrero de Miñón, drafter of the Spanish constitution and former General Secretary of the PP “Historia y memoria”, El País, 24 October 2007. 5 El País, leading article, 18 October 2007. 6 See among leftish criticism, Joaquim Sempere, “Memoria histórica y consolidación democrática”, El País, 31 January 2007. 193
Page 1 and 2:
CRIMES COMMITTED BY TOTALITARIAN RE
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE Lovro Št
Page 5 and 6:
IV. REMEMBRANCE, RECOGNITION AND PU
Page 7 and 8:
Crimes committed by totalitarian re
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142: Crimes committed by totalitarian re
Page 191: Crimes committed by totalitarian re
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
show all

crimes committed by totalitarian regimes - Ministrstvo za pravosodje

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?