Urdangarin and the future of the crown

On December 27, members of the Spanish Congress gave King Juan Carlos a standing ovation after his speech to mark the beginning of its 10th legislature. Lawmakers were showing their support not just for the monarch himself, but also for the institution he represents. Days before, the royal household had announced that the king’s son-in-law, Iñaki Urdangarin, would no longer attend official events. In a televised speech, the king had made clear that his daughter’s husband, implicated in a multi-million-euro embezzlement scandal, was not above the law.

But it is one thing for members of the royal family to have to face the same scrutiny as the rest of society, and another for the accusations against Urdangarin to in some way bring the legitimacy of the royal family’s position into question. This is a debate that some have sought to open, but it is one that should be rejected outright by the Spanish public. The king and his heir represent the legitimacy of Spain’s constitutional monarchy. The allegations against his son-in-law have nothing to do with the political model that Spaniards freely accepted during the transition from dictatorship to democracy in the late 1970s.

Urdangarin has not been formally charged but is accused of misdirecting some of the six million euros sent to his not-for-profit Nóos Institute by regional governments to organize sporting events.

It is the job of the police and the courts to investigate whether some of the money ended up in companies that he ran. The events in question happened between 2004 and 2006, which was when he stepped down as head of the institute. 

An artificial debate

Only a desire on the part of some in the media and public to sensationalize this affair can explain the attempts to use the accusations against Urdangarin as a means to question the legitimacy of the monarchy. If one fact has become clear, it is that the king told his son-in-law to quit his private businesses activities in 2006.

Spain has other things to worry about right now aside from an artificial debate over the monarchy: the economy is on the brink of collapse, we have the highest unemployment levels in Europe, and our banks, and reservoirs, have dried up. At the same time, we face growing social problems. Very few people would question the vital role that the king has played, and continues to play, in supporting our democracy at home and abroad. We live in a complex society, still finding its way forward in many aspects, and that requires continued commitment to strengthening our institutions.

Efforts to question our political model on the basis of events such as those outlined above are nothing less than an undermining of the pact that was agreed to provide Spain with democratic freedoms following the death of General Franco in 1975. We need to support our institutions, not create needless problems; we need to focus on addressing the real problems we face, and reject these theatrical attempts by some to destabilize democracy in their own interests. 

Necessary modernization

Finally, it is clear that whatever the outcome of the Urdangarin case, our monarchy needs to modernize. The energy and dynamism of our king at times contrasts too sharply with a rigid system that prevents things getting done. The recent appointment of a new head of the royal household has already begun to facilitate this process. The respective responsibilities of each member of the royal family need to be clearly established; it is also necessary to establish the appropriate legal safeguards for Prince Felipe; greater transparency is also required; while the professional activities of the king’s wider family members, regardless of whether they are paid out of the public purse, also need to be clearly governed.

Responsibility for these and other related questions lies with Congress, as does coming up with a solution to the longstanding issue of the male line taking precedence over female lineage, a vestige of another age.

Juan Carlos’ decision to renounce the powers invested in him, and to return power to the Spanish electorate, acting as a monarch who reigns, but does not rule, was a major contributing factor to the development of Spain’s modern democracy, and helped protect the country against the military men who plotted its overthrow in the early years following the death of Franco. It is now the politicians’ turn to decide how best to bring up to date an institution that has rendered such exemplary service to the Spanish people and whose moral authority we hope will continue to play a moderating role at this time of crisis and uncertainty.