Trial in Madrid
By ERNEST DAVIES* DURING 1956, Don Antonio Menchaca, a wealthy young businessman, Don Francisco Herrera Oria, brother of the Bishop of Malaga, and Don Fernando Baeza, son of a former ambassador and a publisher, visited Paris and met Spaniards associated with the Republican Gov- ernment in exile. Later a meeting was held at a Madrid hotel attended also by Don Dionisio Ridruejo, former Falangist writer and poet, Don Enrique Tierno Galvan, Professor of Political Law at Salamanca University, Don German de Argumosa, lawyer, Don Raul Moroda, assistant Professor of Political Law, and Don Fermin Solano. After mail being taken from Menchaca's office to the post had been intercepted, and found to contain political pamphlets, all were detained in May, 1957, accused of subversive activities against the State and trying to establish a democratic regime. Released on conditional liberty, legal proceedings were taken against them which culminated in all eight being brought to trial before the Civil Court. in Madrid on March 9, 1961. The prosecution demanded prison sentences of nine years, but after a four-day trial, characterised by peaceful demonstrations by hundreds of students outside the courtroom, a court crowded with a demon- stratively sympathetic audience, and a hearing Which started at low pitch and rose to a crescendo With judge, prosecutor and defence in heated exchanges, seven were acquitted and only one, Menchaca, was found guilty and sentenced to a Year's imprisonment and a fine of about £150.
The morning of the trial the entrance halls of the Palace of Justice filled not only with the accused and their lawyers mingling with many other intellectuals known to be in opposition to the regime, but with journalists and students, who began pouring in until some 500 were press- ing round the courtroom doors. The students were a gbod-humoured lot and the half-a-dozen armed police made no attempt to control them. When the court doors were opened after the lawyers, accused and journalists had been let in, the students pushed forward; the police, now reinforced, tried to push them back, jumping against them and using elbows as battering- rams. The crowd retreated to avoid ribs being staved in or badly bruised, and the police, their object achieved, allowed a few at a time to force their way into the court. In court the prosecutor, Senor Zapatero, was Making his case against the accused, who sat on raised benches facing the tribunal of three pre- sided over by Jose Espinosa. Through examina- tion, the respective attorneys for the defence elicited that the accused had monarchist leanings, that their Paris trips were of an innocent nature, that most of them at some time had been good Falangists, that their activities were those of in- tellectuals rather than politicians. Specific charges were denied, or innocently explained away. 1 he defendants, all intellectuals and from the professional classes, acted with great dignity and replied fearlessly to questions, and often wittily * Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 1950-1. and always intelligently, frequently making the accusations of the prosecutor appear ridiculous. Ridruejo, asked whether when they met in Madrid they had not talked politics, replied that whenever three Spaniards met together they talked about politics, but that they never had any ideas for the present, only for the future. The audience enjoyed such quips, and by its murmur- ings and laughter frequently revealed its sym- pathy with the defendants. And none of the wit- nesses. called admitted any knowledge of the activities of the accused: The second day the atmosphere became more tense and the public more excited. The 800 students who turned up were made to line up outside the building, and did so patiently and in good temper, knowing that only a handful would gain admission—but that was unimportant; their presence was a protest in itself.
When it came to Baeza's attorney's turn, he asked to make an oral statement, as it was to be based on reasoning. The President replied the law did not permit reasoning. Laughter in court. The prosecutor then presented his case in a vigorous fifty-minute harangue characterised by wild allegations concerning the magnitude of the offences which bore no relation to the acts of which the defendants had been accused during the previous proceedings, and of which none had been supported in the evidence. Counsel for the defendants were equally vigorous in reply, and the public now really enjoyed themselves. For instance, Menchaca's counsel in a thirty-minute speech made an indirect political attack on the regime, the constitution and the interpretation the prosecutor had put on innocent intellectual activities. One remark which amused the public was: 'What do we know about' politics? We know about government, we know about the constitution, but we do not know about politics judicially.' All defending counsel took a similar line, claiming their clients to be monarchists, and since Spanish law now provided for a mon- archy, they were working for the future only. The courage and vigour of the defence appeared to surprise the President, and the demonstrative sympathy of the public to shock him. On several occasions he checked the defence counsel, on others suspended the Court.
To suggest that the verdict (even Menchaca will not serve his sentence, as the Pope's amnesty applies in his case) foreshadows important changes in Spain would be mis- leading, but undoubtedly there are increasing signs of a growth in the strength, activity and courage of the opposition to Franco. A year or so ago the students would not have dared to appear in such numbers, or those admitted to court to show such sympathy for the opposition. Nor would the defence attorneys have risked questioning the political basis of the regime. The trial was not, of course, of extremists, but of respected liberal intellectuals, all but one being known monarchists. But all, equally, were known to be opposed to the present form of government and working for the ultimate supersession of `Franco. The regime could not ignore these trends; by arresting them but acquitting all but one, it was hoping temporarily to take the wind out of the opposition's sails. In any case, it should not be assumed there is any permanent let-up in political persecution in Spain.
Meanwhile the greatest encouragement is given to the opposition within Spain by any demonstration of support for it outside, not only because it shows that they are not isolated or forgotten, but also because they believe Franco i3 at present particularly susceptible to external opinion. For this reason alone, the conference for an amnesty for Spanish political prisoners called by leaders of liberal thought in Western Europe and held in Paris last week was of value. Some 700 delegates from a score of countries assembled in the ballroom of a Paris hotel, with its not inappropriate fin de siècle decor, and for two days suffered interminable repetitive speeches while two committees thrashed out resolutions and future action. This was no easy task since a great variety of opinion was repre- sented, stretching from the,-probably predom- inant—Communist to the liberal and conservative humanitarian. But the conference came to life in its last two hours when bundles of peti- tions signed by Spaniards and smuggled out of Spain, together with piles of letters from political prisoners in Spanish gaols, were stacked on the platform, and a selection read by a former Spanish prisoner. Equally impressive was the presence of half a dozen yoUng Spaniards who had considered attendance worth the risk of arrest on return, which they certainly ran be- cause during the conference news was received of the arrest of three students for obtaining signatures to the petition.
Although the moderate, messages sent from the conference to the Pope, the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the Commission of Human Rights are no more likely to bring results than the restrained resolution demanding an amnesty sent to Franco himself, the fact that the conference attracted so Much support from so wide a field, was successfully held and has set up continuing machinery to maintain pressure for an amnesty is of value in helping to focus attention on the continuing political persecution in Spain at a time when opposition there is growing and world opinion may not be without some influence on the regime. -
Previous page
