With labels like “biased,” an “offense” to victims, or a showing of a “grave misunderstanding of historical causality,” the Valencian Council of Culture has rejected the Concordia law along with the laws on À Punt and Educational Freedom. The plenary of the statutory body approved three reports opposing the PP and Vox proposals under debate in the Cortes, yet the session was tense, marked by rebukes, threats of legal action, and the departure of five of the 18 members from the meeting.
The unity and calm that typically characterized discussions of the Porrat de Potries or the Casa dels Bous in El Cabanyal fractured during the debate over the commission’s reports on the three laws. The uproar centered less on the statutes themselves and more on the procedural debate around the reports, as the institution, whose majority leans progressive, sought to articulate a stance against these measures pushed by the PP and Vox in a process often described as political theater.
The reports were given the green light, but five councilors left in protest, arguing that the institution should not pronounce on laws still in parliamentary process. The reports were requested by the Socialist group in the Cortes as well as by the civic organization Acicom, which urged the Council of Culture to take a position on these three measures in the parliamentary pipeline. Two of them, À Punt and Educational Freedom, are slated for final approval this Thursday in the Cortes.
In the documents prepared by the Council’s Legal Commission, which establish the position of the Valencian Council of Culture, the body remains critical of all three norms but especially of the mounting decree that would repeal the Democratic Memory law in Vigo. It characterizes that law as an “offense” to victims, calls it “biased,” notes that it imposes a certain historical narrative, and points to a “grave ignorance of historical causality.” Regarding the rule governing the public broadcaster, the document contends that it has been crafted without consensus. The Education law is described as signaling a “clear reduction of Valencian language teaching,” having “ignored the Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua” and likely affecting the normalization and promotion of the Valencian language.
“Interference”
No sooner had the debate begun than attention shifted to whether the reports could be discussed and passed by the plenary body. The five councilors appointed by the PP argued that the documents fall outside the law, constitute an “interference” in the parliamentary process, and that the Council of Culture lacks the regulatory power to address such measures (bills) and can only speak on draft laws prepared by the Council.
During that warning that the votes on the reports might be beyond the body’s remit, José Vicente Navarro, a critical councilor appointed by the PP and president of Lo Rat Penat, announced “legal actions” against members who supported the resolutions. If the debate had not already intensified, it did so now. “You may attach my statement to your complaint,” replied Ana Noguera, a Socialist councilor who did vote for the reports. “I feel fear; I am not used to threats,” added Gerardo Muñoz, who likewise supported the texts, while calls were made for critics to remain and discuss important matters.
Nevertheless, four of the five left, and the fifth, Marta Alonso, delivered a closing remark noting that the five critical members were simply upholding “respect for the law, the rules, and the procedure.” The president, Dolors Pedrós, acknowledged the absence but reminded that the same had occurred before when the previous president appointed the vice-presidency. Without the five critical members, and with the atmosphere calmer, the three reports on the measures were read and approved by the thirteen members present.