All the Happy Families

The Duke of Palma, Iñaki Urdangarin (from El País).

Last year King Juan Carlos I of Spain did something maybe not unprecedented but certainly unexpected: he offered apologies for his behavior. The story began as one of compassion for him, given that originally the press just informed that he had to undergo hip surgery, a procedure not strange for a man of his age. Days later, it was found out that the operation was the result of an accident while in a hunting safari in Botswana, in a moment when his country had an intense debate over the new budget, whose project included important cuts to social benefits, amidst a severe economic crisis. It was also discovered that the journey was paid by a foreign businessman, allegedly in gratitude for an investment contract given to him. Under major public criticism, before leaving the hospital he said: “I am very sorry, I was wrong, and this will not happen again.”

This episode added up to another major corruption scandal which involving the Spanish Royal family. In late 2011 it was found out that the Duke of Palma, Iñaki Urdangarin, son-in-law of the King, had diverted money originally given for his charity organization, Nóos Institute, in collaboration with other public officers. These acts would have also served to evade taxes. In such occasion, the King sentenced “Justice is equal for everyone”, in reference to him not interceding in favor of Urdangarin. As a form of punishment on behalf of the Royal Family, Urdangarin was barred from taking part in any official act, and his profile was erased from the Royal Family website. The case is still in the courts.

Yesterday, Diego Torres, a former associate of Urdangarin and also beneficiary from the alleged illegal activity of Nóos, mentioned during the trial that all the activities of the foundation were within the law. Trying to underscore his point, he added that they always had the approval of the House of the King and of the King himself. As evidence, he showed copies of e-mails which include phrases such as “the Boss [meaning the King] thinks it is O.K.”, or “as my father-in-law told you […]”. This is a major step. In previous declarations, defendants had mentioned that people close (their personal secretaries, for instance) to the King or his daughters new about the assumed illegalities of Nóos. But now, the King is now implicated in a major corruption scandal.

Unsurprisingly, this situation has sprouted some debate in relation to the impartiality of the rule of law and of the public usefulness of the monarchy. It can be alleged that given the unhappy two previous experiences of Spain with a republican system, the option of eliminating the monarchy is not under consideration. The monarchy as an idea is not democratic, but the King had a major role in building it. In addition, because Spanish citizens hold the King and the institution of the Crown in a good esteem, they expect that the current behavior of Juan Carlos matches the historical image they have of him. During the last months this has not been the case. But an impartial rule of law is central to democracy. Thus, people do expect that the rule of law is not twisted to protect Urdangarin.