Miquel Roca: “we Decided politically what was appropriate to do politically”

SPECIAL: 40 years of the Constitution

Seven ‘fathers’ of the Constitution that could be nine

Regarding the pactismo nationalist during the Transition, Miquel Roca (Bordeaux, France, 1940) it is one of the three ‘fathers’ of the Constitution alive. Stresses that in a democracy “nothing is solved without agreements”, though he warns that a constitutional reform should materialize “with the same consensus that 40 years ago.” Rock represented in the Paper to the Minority Basque and Catalan, and, later, was deputy of the former CiU. A lawyer by profession, contributed his experience as a jurist to the Transition and now practices law, having participated in well-known cases of high impact for the economy and the political and social life of the country.

what budgets maximum resigned Minority Basque and Catalan?We do not waive anything. You approach always in agreement with the will of transaction and what are the disclaimers point are implied in the whole negotiating process. I feel solidary and responsible of the constitutional text as a whole. In 1978, we resolved politically what was appropriate to do politically. Now may outweigh the ideological differences. At that time we had to build a State apparatus. What was the main stumbling block is found? There is much talk of Title VIII, but I don’t remember that particular conflict. No more, for example, that the definition of social market economy, or what relative to religion. We discussed less the aconfesionalidad of the State. Do you write now in a different way the Title VIII, on the basis of the model regional and territorial?Maybe yes, but it is not fundamental. We proceeded to the decentralization of territorial power, as in no other european country. Is more: the only reference was to the Federal Republic of Germany, but there the decentralization made the German tanks. Rather than improving the Title VIII can be better implemented. To the extent that the autonomous State has taken body have appeared dysfunctions. Isn’t it unwise to prosecute the suit for the constitution of the errors of their own regional governments to deliver the State of the Autonomies? This is an idea that goes to me. There may be errors, but the suit constitutional allows and would much. There is an important part of the competences of the communities that are given in the framework of the basic legislation of the State, as the regional finances. Some constitutional scholars advocate a reform to close the autonomous State and to delimit the powers. Do you agree?I do not believe in the models closed. Or in the topic autonomic, or anything. The Constitution says that the military service is obligatory and we have made it voluntary. In many countries of our environment, to legalize gay marriage, they have had to call a referendum. Not here. The Constitution is an open model that allows adapting to the changing times. The best way to limit skills is common sense.The parliamentary Monarchy and the State of Autonomies are two keys of vault of the system 78. Is there a danger of regression?The whole system generates symbols that identify it. And when there is a reply, will be going to the symbols. Now, if there are more references to the debate on republic or monarchy or to the regions is because they symbolize the Constitution. There is concern about the emergence of populism, especially because it is not the solution. Our society has problems whose resolution is not dependent on the King or of the autonomous communities. In France, the demonstrations of the last few days in Paris are huge and have a republic and a centralisation of more power.

we Knew that we had to agree. We demanded the street. It would have been a failure not to do so. Now there is a kind of fear of compromise. The one who does is a weak

how You can equate the term ‘nationality’ (article 2) with the ‘nation’?Fish-Beard contributed in the Congress platform for the expression of Anselmo Carretero “nation of nations”. It is good for a reason: Spain is a singular event. If anyone knows the History of Spain knows that this is so. And no one should deny me that if there is an open concept is the nation. Which brought Fish-Beard was not bad, but to the extent that the magnificent becomes transcendent. In 1978, quite naturally, we talked of the multi-national reality of Spain. What are the differences between politics of four decades ago and doing it today?At that moment, we knew that we had to agree. We demanded the street. No one criticized, because different parties we’re in agreement. Upside down, it would have been a failure not to do so. Now there is a kind of fear to agree. The one who does is weak and has given up. Are you in favor of reforming the Fundamental Law? I’m not very keen on touching the Constitution, but in any case it would have to do with a majority like that of 40 years ago. At this moment we see in the parties will reach agreement? Further progress can be made in a model federalizante making the Senate a true chamber of territorial representation. The political fragmentation, unlike the present, was not an obstacle for the political coordination.The minority knew that our obligation was to facilitate the covenant, not obstruct it. We provide the governments of Suarez, Gonzalez and Aznar. I’m not going to say this, but if we are a plural society we must understand that this is not about respecting differences, but to make them possible. Montesquieu said that moderation is a discipline. Was it a mistake to subsume the differences of Catalonia and the Basque Country in the ‘coffee for all’?With which it is falling, do you imagine that there is coffee for everyone? I can not deny anyone the right to claim for myself. In Catalonia, the support to the Constitution was the rate of 91.1%. Now the breakdown remains on the table. What has happened to you?We have passed a clear disaffection. The result of this I don’t know what it will be. I’m impressed by the change in the Catalan society. What I do ask of you is that a constitutional change must rest on majorities. Not worth it with a 50,01%. What that has to last you must have behind a clear support. What was wrong PNV asking for abstentions?I’m not going to criticize or praise. In any case, the Statute of basque and the financing, that has not gone wrong, rest in the Constitution. How do you assess the role of King Juan Carlos?Did what he had to do, that is a compliment enormous. Not everybody did what had to be done. Promised to return sovereignty to the people and he did. He established a parliamentary Monarchy not surrounded by any special privilege. He fulfilled his duty. Does Felipe VI, is doing now what has that beencer?The symbolic identification makes it more vulnerable to the criticism of the dome system. In a parliamentary Monarchy, the King does what the Government tells you. And if not, bad. There is an attempt to transfer responsibilities to the Crown, but of the speeches of the King responds to the Government. What changes would be necessary to operate to restore the credit of the Justice?Do not discuss the political life and to undertake a little at a profound reform. The system of election of the Judiciary is not the main problem.

According to the criteria of

Learn more