The Ministry of Culture and the SGAE take time to the edge of the abyss. Sometimes they look at him, look out, and take steps towards him. Others, suddenly, retreat and move away from the ravine. The ministry announced just a week ago that he would ask the judge for the intervention of the entity, after too many months of misunderstandings and lack of confidence. Days later, José Guirao seemed to qualify his intention and, nevertheless, on Wednesday sent a new requirement to the SGAE with which he forbade the granting of advances-loans to members. Now it is the entity itself that reach out to Culture to get away from the precipice: today, Friday, he has sent a series of promises in which, basically, he commits himself to comply with the main wishes of the Ministry. In return, the SGAE hopes to avoid the intervention announced. In fact, the minister could renounce the intervention once the letter was sent to the judge.
On September 27, 2018, Culture sent a warning to the entity, where he threatened for the first time with his intervention if he did not solve before January three outstanding issues: the reform of the statutes -to adapt them to a European directive-, the introduction of electronic voting in his elections and the modification of the distribution, to avoid misalignments in favor of the music broadcast at dawn, that nobody sees but enters millions, and that investigates justice. Well, the SGAE now proposes an arrangement for the three issues: change its regulation to include electronic voting, "apply directly" the new European directive "without the intermediation of the statutes", and submit to whatever the court decides on the distribution of 2018. Here is an indication of the complications experienced by the entity: its last three semester distributions of income between partners are appealed before the courts.
"In virtue of this triple commitment, the SGAE has asked Culture to file the warning file. In parallel, the entity is committed to withdraw the contentious-administrative appeal filed against the aforementioned warning, "reads a statement issued by the SGAE. The National Court already rejected on January 29 the request of the SGAE to paralyze the warning of the ministry.
The SGAE strives
The board of directors of the entity also highlights the efforts made in recent months. And remember that you drew up a proposed amendment to the bylaws in the foreseen received 58.01% of votes in favor in the Assembly General of the partners in December. However, he needed a two-thirds majority, hence the reform was rejected. "The board of directors has no responsibility whatsoever over the decision of the Assembly. Understand that has promoted the modification of the statutes to where it reaches its competence, "defends the document. Therefore, the SGAE also informs the ministry that it will provide a report detailing how to apply the European directive while awaiting the reform of the statutes, while promising to try again to submit them to the vote of the Assembly in "a while". prudential".
The movement of the entity adds doubts on the way to intervention, for which Culture needs, in any case, the authorization of a judge. On the one hand, hundreds of creators such as Pedro Almodóvar, Álvaro Urquijo, Isabel Coixet, Miguel Ríos or Coque Malla asked the ministry for an "urgent and necessary" action, so that it ceases its president, José Ángel Hevia, and the board of directors and that reversed the distribution of rights in June and December 2018. On the other, Culture sources explain that several well-known and important names of the sector, and of powerful television networks, have transferred their opposition to the intervention. Both the SGAE and the Ministry have made it clear that this was the last resort and the least desired.
The panorama, as usual in the SGAE, is complicated by the many other fronts open at the same time: the conclusion of the deontological commission (that accuses 14 members of the SGAE leadership, including Hevia, of conflicts of interest); the complaint of the entity itself against several publishers; a series of judicial sentences that question both the actions of the last months of the SGAE and its distributions; or the judicial investigation on the music issued at dawn, a strip in which many members of the current board of directors often act.