Conviction
Actor convicted posthumously of slander in Civil War case
The Spanish Supreme Court has confirmed the conviction of the Catalan actor Pepe Rubianes, who died in March 2009, for slandering the mayor of Salamanca, Julián Lanzarote, of the Popular Party (PP), in a ruling released last Wednesday. The conviction was issued in June 2007 by the Provincial High Court of Salamanca, which considered it proven that the Catalan actor had written the slander, concerning the "Salamanca Papers," on a Catalan news website.
The papers in question emanated from the Catalan government during the Spanish Civil War. When the Republic lost the war and Catalan autonomy was abolished, the papers were taken to Salamanca and stored there in the Franco regime's Civil War Archive, now known as the Historical Memory Center. Since Franco's death the Catalan regional government has often called for their return to Catalonia. This finally took place in 2006, against the bitter, histrionic opposition of Salamanca's mayor Julián Lanzarote — hence the vituperation on the Catalan website.
In the article Rubianes called the Salamanca mayor an "idiot" and a "wretch" for his stance on the removal of the papers from the Civil War Archive, adding "what the fuck can he possibly read?" and expressing the hope that Lanzarote should "drown in his own shit."
In the first instance, the Magistrate’s Court of Salamanca dismissed the mayor's complaint; but this ruling was revoked by the Provincial High Court, which recognized the existence of slander, and sentenced the actor to publish the sentence on the same website for a period of two days.
Now the Supreme Court has taken the same line, considering that Rubianes' expressions "redound to the discredit of the person concerned, and in view of his public role have a social transcendence, constituting an inadmissible insult to his reputation."
The ruling, issued by the judge Xavier O'Callaghan, also explains that the Catalan actor "is not a person devoted to the world of politics, but a third party outside the political ambit, so that the prevailing doctrine concerning vehement discourse in political contention cannot be applied here." In further justification, the Supreme Court adds that "one may criticize and censure as forcefully as seems necessary, but not resort to gross insult."
(Published by El País – June 8, 2010)