The Supreme Court has established that a cross containing a list of deaths from only one side of the Civil War “represents exaltation of the military uprising, the Civil War and the repression of the Dictatorship.” Therefore, it is contrary to the Historical Memory Law. With this argument, the sentence supports the removal of a cross in front of the church of Callosa del Segura (Alicante).
The ruling of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber dismisses the appeal by the Citizen Platform in defense of the Cross against a 2017 City Council agreement that rejected a proposal from the PP spokesperson to preserve the monument.
The High Court agrees with the previous decisions of a court in Elche and the Valencian Superior Court of Justice. “We are faced with a religious symbol – cross – that contains elements that prevent it from recognizing a neutral value as a mere artistic or artistic-religious symbol. On the contrary, its presence in a public space allows us to appreciate an act of exaltation insofar as it contributes to enhancing the merit of that civil conflict with the inclusion of the list of deaths from only one side, which, implicitly, also entails the disapproval of the opposing side in social perception,” the magistrates affirm.
The ruling indicates that the case studied differs from those resolved in Galicia and Navarra referring to a cross and a monolith, which the appellants had put forward. In those two cases, all elements of exaltation of the Civil War and the dictatorship had been eliminated, so the contradiction does not exist. Nor can the case be compared to the one that the TS addressed in 2014, where what was in question was whether the persistence of such a religious symbol compromised the non-denominational nature of the State and its neutrality, which was denied by the high court.
In the new resolution, the Supreme Court follows what was held in the rulings on the exhumation of the remains of Francisco Franco, maintaining that with the one relating to the Callosa de Segura Cross “the aim is nothing more than to remove from the foreground whatever it means, represents or “symbolizes civil confrontation. This purpose is not incompatible with religious freedom nor does it imply denying or ignoring anyone’s beliefs.”
The Supreme Court considers essential the fact that a list of deceased people had been maintained on the plinth of the cross – the base – “which prevents it from being considered neutral”, despite the removal of a plaque referring to José Antonio Primo de Rivera and Falangist heroes.
