In the mid-nineties, someone with the audacity commonly described as an all-purpose drive pressed a red button in a control room, handing over the reins to a newly formed Alicante Medical University so it could chart an autonomous path under its own leadership. Today, Miguel Hernández University has established a foothold and has many arguments to defend its very reason for being. So, when Consell decided that UA should reclaim the contested faculty and resume teaching there, the UMH rector’s response felt logical, especially given his deep background in genetics and the study of heredity. He made clear that the situation was political in nature, a stance that carries with it both consequences and responsibilities for the institutions involved. (Citation: UMH)
When the moment arrived for him to deliver that diagnosis, it seemed possible that his aim was simply to confirm a fact that observers with administrative duties on the campuses might find fitting. Yet he extended his commentary, describing the move as reckless because there was not even a building ready, and they were talking about starting work from scratch. What is said to him in return? Reflecting on events from 26 years prior, one recalls a parallel episode that echoes through the culture of cinema as well as university life, a moment reminiscent of the scene where a storied character — Captain Renault, in a nod to a famous line from Casablanca — remarks, with a mix of irony and resignation, that scandal has arrived before the actual budget, and then proceeds to act according to a different script. The sentiment lingers: as soon as a plan or a budget falls apart, the practical steps seem to blur into a different kind of theater. (Citation: UMH)
Attention was sharpened by the fact that these contradictory positions surfaced not in a public forum or a formal briefing, but through the internal chatter of the academic institution during the festive hours of the “Day of Freedom of the Press,” a moment that can feel almost privately staged within a public event. In this context, it hardly presents an ideal example for students or staff who are watching how decisions are communicated and contested. The episode serves as a reminder that governance within universities often unfolds with competing narratives and that transparency—a banner often waved in public discourse—depends as much on the cadence of internal dialogue as on external declarations. (Citation: UMH)