Resignation or mockery

Though foreseeable enough, the Catalan regional High Court’s formal implication of Oriol Pujol Ferrusola for influence trafficking is a significant piece of news, and a dismaying one. He is the secretary-general of Convergència Democràtica (CDC), the first-ranking Catalan political party, which is hegemonic in the regional government, in which CiU bloc partner Unió takes a junior role. At the same time it is one of the major Spanish parties that did most for the smooth transition to democracy after Franco’s death, as well as aiding democratic stability during the last 30 years, however unsound its present secessionist drift may be.

Though the formal targeting of Pujol Ferrusola in the court’s investigation is above all a personal issue, the salient point here is his family link with one of the great figures of the Transition, the founder and leader of the CDC party, his father Jordi Pujol, whose political heir many consider Oriol aspires to be. If the judicial investigation now formally opened ends with a conviction, a shadow will also fall on widespread networks of complicity, built over decades, and supposedly serving as channels for the alleged influence trafficking.

These collateral circumstances were implicitly alluded to by Pujol Ferrusola, in that he has yet to renounce any post in the party. Resignation constitutes an unconditional act, though it may be reversible. No, he has not resigned, but rather “delegated” his functions. He who delegates powers conserves them by original right, and attributes to himself the ability to recover them at any time. He is ceding their use, not their ownership. This may seem like a detail, but it illustrates a reaction markedly typical of the hereditary-monarchical principle: it was the kings who delegated to viceroys the deployment of their power, in given territories and for given times.

Pujol’s nuanced withdrawal is a burlesque travesty of the role of resignation in a democracy

Oriol Pujol’s nuanced withdrawal from the center of the political stage is a burlesque travesty of the role of resignation in a democracy. It has the appearance of a resignation, but it is not. It is a mockery. The source of the power transferred to the various “delegates” creates mere photocopies of the person who has falsely resigned; who, with the permission of the regional premier, will retain the bare title of the post, while his pseudo-viceroys carry on the vicarious exercise of his apparent power. But this is not the worst aspect of the affair. The worst part is that Catalan nationalism is taking on a cynical drift: its leaders pretend to act out of respect for the rank-and-file members of the party, by stepping down definitively or temporarily from their party posts; but the voters receive a contemptuous slap in the face when they see party leaders keep their parliamentary seats even when under suspicion of criminal activity.

The undue appropriation of the parliamentary function stems, of course, from the desire to receive privileged treatment in the courts. But it is doubly undue, since parliamentary immunity in democracies was originally justified as a shield against military coups and absolutist judicial snares: not as carte blanche for individual schemes and swindles.