Book of Memories of the King Emeritus Juan Carlos, ReconciliationIt contains a constitutional reflection that is worth stopping at.
According to his interpretation, the fact that the Constitution creates the monarchy by explicitly citing it means that “the monarchy is not based on several generations of constitutional monarchs; it rests entirely on me. It is not like the United Kingdom, which has never known a republic. By excluding the Royal House, I fear that the Royal House will weaken the monarchy. I fear that a rift will be created that would break the foundations with the risk of the whole thing collapsing at the slightest storm.”
Let us ignore the small historical error of the British not knowing about the republic, since they acquired it in the seventeenth century, only under the name of the Commonwealth of England and also in the French manner, after the king was beheaded, Charles IThis never happened with the two Spanish republics.
Let’s focus on the main thing, which is logically the institution in Spain, and not abroad.
The King Emeritus is right in saying that the 1978 Constitution created the monarchy because it deviated from the monarchical constitutions in our history that recognized this institution as an institution. Prius Before that, a certain thing, somewhat similar to the territory and population with which the state had to be built.
So Antonio Canovas del Castillo I assumed that it is an essential part of the internal (historical) constitution of our country.
Juan Carlos I, on November 5 in Au Grove (Pontevedra).
On the contrary, the current text states that “the Crown of Spain is hereditary in the successors of His Majesty Don Juan Carlos I of the Bourbons, the legitimate heir of the historic dynasty.”
Until 1978, no king appeared in Lex Law articles.
Juan Carlos’ statement that approval in the referendum gave the monarchy additional democratic legitimacy is also true, without much difference now between whether “87% of Spaniards” voted for him, as he incorrectly indicated, or only the participants in the referendum of December 6, 1978.
In any case, nearly sixteen million Spaniards voted in favor of the current constitution, which sanctifies the parliamentary monarchy as “the political form of the Spanish state.”
Now, to assert that, since the monarchy was founded upon it, it “falls entirely upon me,” is more than a debatable, if not distorted, or rather, outdated, opinion. The concept of ownership as an institution dependent on one person cannot be maintained.
From a legal standpoint, because ownership is based on the constitution, like other state institutions.
From a political standpoint, because the crown finds its legitimacy in social benefit, that is, in how the king exercises his functions.
If today more than a few theoretical Republicans are happy to accept being head of state as well Philip VI Because we consider it to perform a useful function for political and social coexistence.
“From a constitutional point of view, it is very clear that there is little attack on the Crown for criticizing someone who is no longer its possessor.”
To put it in the words of a good friend: Today it seems that “a parliamentary monarchy is the only possible republic in Spain.”.
Thus, Juan Carlos is wrong again when he writes that “by attacking me, it is not my personality that is being attacked, because from now on I am basically petty, but the institution of the Crown. By discrediting it, the state, the unity of the country and its democratic foundations are harmed.”
From a constitutional point of view, there is clearly little attack on the Crown for criticizing someone who is no longer its owner, and even more so for someone who is no longer its owner by his conduct. Because as the teacher says Manuel AragonThe king’s irresponsibility has its counterpart to his idealism.
Juan Carlos did not have, Then he abdicated the throne in June 2014.
It is also clear that it does not bring the prestige of the crown that whoever held it exploited it for private business, some of which bordered on criminal.
Thus, it is true that more than one enemy of the monarchy attacks the titular king in order to weaken the institution.
But the solution is not as he asks, to stop criticizing him. On the contrary, it is a new reason for criticism.
We cannot say that the solution to the criticism directed at the monarchy because of Juan Carlos is that the king did not commit these shameful actions, because that is like crying over spilled milk.
But the solution (which is well within his reach) is to accept all rebukes directed at him with dignity, which would ensure, over time, that his fortune (his crucial contribution to the founding of democracy) would once again occupy a more prominent place than his responsibility (his subsequent less-than-exemplary behavior).
To put it in his own, somewhat trite, words from November 2007: “Why don’t you just shut up?”
*** Agustín Ruiz Robledo is Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Granada Visiting Professor at BITS Law School From Bombay.