Author of two books on the Spanish Royal House –An exemplary monarchy (La Catarata, 2014) and A monarchy protected by censorship (La Foca, 2009) – whose publication, as he explains, they tried to stop from different instances of the State, Iñaki Anasagasti (Cumaná, Venezuela, 1947) now considers that the investigations opened against Juan Carlos I for his alleged illicit enrichment and tax evasion have finished by agreeing with him.
The Treasury informed the National Court that Juan Carlos I never declared accounts abroad
The historic leader of the PNV already said in 2014 that the king emeritus was “corrupt”, words that cost him harsh criticism from analysts and political officials, but which he said were justified by the stories of different personalities who knew closely the activities of the father of Felipe VI. After departing from the front line in 2015, when his term as senator ended, Anasagasti continues to be very active on social networks and maintains a blog where he analyzes current affairs, always from a critical point of view. The nationalist politician attended elDiario.es this week by telephone.
In 2014 you said that Juan Carlos I was “a great corrupt man”. At that time, what data did you have to support that accusation?
I did not have direct data, but I had conversations with people who had been on those official trips. The impunity with which Juan Carlos walked was typical of a man who felt very protected by the structures of the State. And he traveled with his lover, who was a lobbyist. I received comments from people who told me that it was vox populi and a scandal that on their travels everyone knew who Corinna was, what she did and the type of intervention that was done.
What criticism did you receive then?
I know that some parties were considering denouncing me. But they did not come to that because, of course, I was appraised at that time and that would have meant a lifting of the appraisal with a request that was going to cause a political debate in which they did not want to enter. They saw that it was too evident that I wasn’t going to wrinkle.
Do you consider that the open investigations against Juan Carlos I have ended up giving him the reason?
Yes, and I am also very outraged above all by the attitude of personalities such as former Foreign Minister José Manuel García Margallo, with whom I had the last strong disagreement. He was a super monarchist and a super democrat and said he was from the extreme center. I asked him about those trips of the then king, and he refused them in parliamentary headquarters. How is it possible that in parliamentary headquarters, in a democratic country, you can lie and absolutely nothing happens? At fifteen days, in The world He himself recognized that Corinna was on one of those trips of the King Emeritus. But he denied it to me in parliament. These people who are super smart, super democrat and super cool, at the moment of truth have been the great cover-ups. The greatest damage that nobody has been able to do to Juan Carlos, apart from his personal non-qualities, have been all these courtiers who have protected him. It has been terrible, because they have not allowed democracy to work, with the great contradiction that their mouths fill up saying that this is a parliamentary monarchy and I always remember that it is monarchy and parliamentary, but here Parliament cannot act against the monarchy, then what parliamentary monarchy is this? That irritated them a lot.
Lately, there has also been talk of shielding some media outlets to the figure of the emeritus king.
Yes of course. I remember a phrase that Juan Luis Cebrián said: ‘The Spanish monarchy cannot resist an editorial by The country‘. It was overkill, but it was very graphic. I have read the last article that he has published in The country praising the importance of monarchy. In other words, he has not gotten off the donkey. The media of the Prisa group have been largely responsible for the cover-up of the king emeritus, because nothing that would have been more critical would have tempted the clothes. But impunity was based on censorship, and censorship is exercised by the media, which has been silent. When I said that the Spanish monarchy was useless they even editorialized against me.
Do you consider that the State is in a position to treat the case of Juan Carlos I with all legal guarantees?
Not at all. We have a very monarchical judiciary and very attached to the right and we always have the threat that a country cannot be further destabilized, much less in a situation like the one we are experiencing in a pandemic and economic crisis, and with a coalition government with We can. Therefore, they will do absolutely nothing. They are going to do makeup.
How do you think you can conclude the procedural situation of Juan Carlos I?
If there is still no ruling by the Constitutional Court on the issue of abortion, the same may happen. They can delay it, Juan Carlos is 82 years old and the time will come when this man, like every human being, will end his days and this issue will not have been followed up.
Does it seem reasonable to you to distinguish, as you are trying to be part of the Government and the PP, the figure of Felipe VI from that of his father and completely disassociate him from everything that is being known?
I understand him politically because he is the head of state. But I do not understand it from the point of view of a healthy and valued democracy. That they say that Felipe did not find out about anything is like that of his sister Cristina, that he did not find out about anything that her husband, Iñaki Urdangarin, did. I dont believe it.
Do you predict that these investigations can lead to a debate on the state model, between the Republic and the monarchy?
Undoubtedly, this pristine image of the monarchy is very much touched. The proof is that the CIS does not want to ask questions that could fuel that debate. But democracy is a regime of public opinion, and current public opinion has nothing to do with that of ten years ago, when we were all drugged. Then it was the most valued institution. Now it is not the most valued institution. I think if the question arises as to which is the least valued institution, it would be the monarchy. They’ve earned it. Felipe VI, who acted with such speed with the Catalan theme, with this he is letting the subject rot, waiting for how the tempos are happening.
A part of the Government declares itself openly republican. Do you think the conditions exist for opening the constitutional melon?
I do not think so. The Constitution tied it and tied it well, closed it and it is very closed. To change a monarchy it has to be for the revolution or for something very strong outside. At the moment, the PSOE is going to act in the keys of the PP and Citizens on this issue and that shields the current monarch.
Is there anything Felipe VI can do to clean the institution?
Yes, in the first place you should go out before public opinion, as you came up with the issue of procés and say: ‘He is my father, I have respect and affection for him, but with the indications that there are, it seems that he is not exemplary behavior.’ And in the face of non-exemplary conduct, so that there is no confusion between the head of the State and personal issues, in the first place it should take away the title of king emeritus, because if it can be given, it can be taken away and nothing happens. Second, he has to get his father into the most absolute silence, that no photos of him appear on hunts or in francachelas, because public opinion would not tolerate it. The Court of Accounts cannot infer at all in the Royal House, and that receives public money. There are General State Budgets in which items of more than eight million euros are approved, but there is no information. Just as in England you know what Queen Elizabeth spends on hats and hairdressing, here nothing is known, everything is opaque. Felipe would have to take a giant step, placing the Royal House as the most transparent, making all expenses known. All those gifts, those debates about whether he had been given a Ferrari, are an scandal inappropriate for a serious, democratic and valued country. In addition, the current king must have a conduct adjusted to law.
In a interview in elDiario.es, President Sánchez proposed that the inviolability of the king be retouched so that he maintained the same legal treatment as the rest of public offices.
Anyone who is graduated can always be reported and the petition can be requested. The king would have to have the same appraisal as Pedro Sánchez. What happens is that the Constitution that was approved in 1978 closed it in such a way because it had sin. It was born with the sin of putting us into the Matute monarchy and from what had come from behind, from the headquarters of General Franco. So the king was shielded. Hence the phrase ‘tied and well tied’ is understood, but that must be untied.
Should there be a historical review of the role of Juan Carlos I in the Transition or in episodes like that of 23F?
The Constitution clearly says that the king moderates and arbitrates. I as a PNV spokesman for 30 years have not seen that the king has moderated or arbitrated absolutely nothing. In any case, he had to be tempered. I went several times to the Palacio de la Zarzuela to ask him to moderate Aznar, for example, when he started that campaign against the PNV trying to unite the PNV with ETA. He did nothing. His role in 23F is a role that we do not have all the information on and he was one of the great culprits because all the rebels did it in the name of His Majesty the king, therefore the king knew everything that was going to happen and he did not prevented at source. It will be questioned who was the engine of change and all those kinds of things.