Something more than a "cacicada"

This article of Camilo Jose Cela ( Nobel Prize and the status of Real Senador), seem to us a typical cacicada (to see the translation from catalan; caciquismo=domination or excesive influence of caciques; cacique=chief, local ruler or local party boss.)

In effect, in this article he denounces the mutual incompatibility of the obligatory military service (only-for-men) and the equality between sexes proclaimed in the article 14 of the Spanish Constitution. On the other hand, he speaks about the dissimulation of the political rulers (when he mentions the question of obligatory service).

This article was written in January 1993 . The military service were effective until the end of the 2001. It is like our leaders were " sending balls outside " or dissimulating during 8 years . But the Constitution that prohibits "all discrimination by means of sex " is dating from 1978. And since then the public powers have been continuing "to send balls outside" for almost 15 years more. Totaly 23 years without respecting this article of the Constitution, wich is, in addition, a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT .
This seems to indicate that there are some who can prevent that the fundamental rights of the Spaniards will be respected.

Is this compatible with the
"Rule of Law State"?

If somebody can decide that our fundamental rights will not be respected, it is only the "Judicial Power" who decides to refuse to respect them wich means prevarication, because the judges are forced to respect the laws. And much more, the fundamental rights are not only the obligation of the judges, but also of the civil employees. It´s a convinction that another power tries to prevent the judges to respect the law, which means that the judicial power is not independent . Evidently, saying this about Spain is like discovering the Américas ". But this case is exceptional, because it has affected to many young people for 23 years. Also, what is more interesting they have given rise to thousands and thousands of trails against young people whom they saw as rebellious only because they didn´t want to do the military service (in Spanish:"milli"). Were all of these "comical trails" or they didn, that is not considering the fundamental rights?

How could it happen this?

SUCH AS LEAVES _ _ _ ___________ _ _ Diari de Barcelona, 13 - 1 - 1993

Women of troops


For me it does not seem that it is a conquest of women, the fact that we are treating now with the obligatory character of the military service. I would have understood it as a conquest of all, men and women, as well who have despided the obligatory military service and that they could accede to the volunteer military service all of those who wanted to do it without no discrimination by meaning of sex.

But the problem presents two facets wich inevitably are used to be misunderstood, because they are not easy take them one by one. On the other hand, if the woman has the same rights as the man in everything before the law, ( art. 14 of the Constitution), is evident that there is no reason to pardon her the other obligations as the man has. And on the other hand would not be better to take the position offside* for a while and hope that there will be a clarification of the meaning of obligatory or volunteery service of the future army.

*Literaly, "sending balls outside", "llançar pilotes fora", in original catalan langage.

Who were these who decided to follow the advice of the Real Senator and not to apply the Constitution? It seems they were ALL the parties, because no one of them wanted to denounce this flagrant violation of the Constitution. In this image of an article of Edip King published in Segovia, we can see clearly the idea of the government and the opposition taking the hair of the recruits (represented by Felipe Gonzalez and Jose Mª Aznar. It is of 1ª half of 90).

The parties, all of them did not want to denounce this violation of these rights. And we complained that Franco would suspend the rights! Our rulers nowadays do not need to warn us that our rights will be suspended ! They will do it, without realizing, without warning!

But there is more. So great was the opposition to mili that in 2001, there was 1 million young people in prorogation, and 1 million more between rebellious and objetctors of conscience.

How could it be hidden to us during for so much time, the violation of this fundamental right?

´Felipe Gonzalez and Aznar pulls joungs mens leg ("hair", in spanish)

More than cacicada

It must be very powerful the Spanish caciques now governing, so that the judges to obey them so blindly and so quietly!

But, according to the investigations of Oedipus King, cacicada was something more, and what was, now it has grown still more.

Oedipus King has investigated the case with very few means. Bearly saying that neither the public power, nor the parties, have facilitated our work. It is logical to say they are violating the Constitution, meaningly the individual and fundamental rights. We have investigating during many years with few means but very patiently.

Evidently, we have not found a politician that seemed to have respected the violated rights, not only in this case. "They do not know anything", or they do not give them importance, despite of the cruel traumas caused even to children, mutilating their capacity to think .

But there is more: we have not found either a random, nor a lawyer who seemed to realize this contradiction between mili and the prohibition of discrimination by meanings of sex. And all agreed in which this discrimination existed! Practically all have defended rebellious, but they have not remembered it in the judgments!

Who has erased the minds of the lawyers during so much time? It is something surprising considering that almost all newspaper and televisions have spoken of the acts of the rebellious ones and of the judgments attributed to them.

This " forgetfulness " of the lawyers seems a "wonderfull thing". It is more difficult to think than, for example, the doctors suddenly forgot that there exists antibiotics instead of amputantic the infected members as it happened in the case of mili, when the young lawyer Angel Navarro opposed the Obligatory Service because the discrimination by meaning of sex, in 1991. That is, years before this article had been written...

But this young lawyer, slope of the Obligatory Service, had to threaten the courts denouncing them from prevarication so that they took him the case. Therefore, lettre applied to the advice of the Nobel prize "avant la lettre ".

_ More information in thematic Map => EQUALITY, and RULE OF LAW

_ More in spanish : Mapa temático ==> IGUALDAD y DERECHO