World
The Spanish Government Maintains a Selective Policy for Declassifying Official Documents
The release of papers on Ceuta and the 23-F coup attempt once again brought back into debate the Executive’s broad discretion while the Franco-era official secrets law remains in force. Meanwhile, documents linked to the surveillance of Catalan independence activists remain under seal.
The recent release of official documents on the Ceuta crisis reignited debate in Spain over the Government’s authority to lift secrecy on a case-by-case basis, in a context in which the Franco-era rule governing the matter has still not been replaced.
According to eldiario.es, in this term the Executive promoted on its own initiative two major declassifications: the one linked to Ceuta and the one involving the 23-F papers. It also ended up publishing documentation on Abdelbaki Es Satty, the imam from Ripoll identified as the mastermind of the 2017 Barcelona attacks, in a move the outlet attributes to pressure from Junts.
By contrast, the Government did not open a large part of the National Intelligence Center documents on the surveillance of independence supporters and only partially lifted the secrecy on Supreme Court rulings that authorized those actions, although with redactions that prevent a full review.
Historian Javier Buces, quoted by eldiario.es, said that as long as the current legislation remains in force, declassifications will be isolated decisions, driven by political interest or social demand. He also warned that this framework makes it difficult to access the truth about episodes in recent history and about acts of state violence during the transition.
According to the Spanish outlet, two initiatives to change the official secrets regime remain stalled in Congress: a Government bill and another proposal from the PNV. The current rules, the publication adds, keep documents under secrecy with no expiration date, unless the Executive decides otherwise or a court request intervenes.
To justify the release of the Ceuta papers, the Government invoked transparency reasons and said it sought to allow citizens to directly review the information handled by institutions during the crisis. In the case of 23-F, the Executive argued that it was responding to a sustained demand from historians, journalists and parliamentary groups, and that the passage of time had eliminated any real risk to the security and defense of the State.
However, when judges requested information on the use of Pegasus in the surveillance of Catalan independence activists, the official response was negative. According to eldiario.es, the magistrates asked whether the CNI had a license for the program, who bought it from NSO Group, how much it cost and which people took part in the operation, in addition to documentation on contracting, installation, payment, training and support.
The Government refused to provide those data, arguing that doing so would pose a serious threat to CNI sources and collaborators. In a response sent in June of this year, Justice Minister Félix Bolaños denied the judge specific information on the surveillance of former CUP lawmakers and argued that its disclosure could seriously harm national security and compromise national defense.
Sources
About this note. Written by El Notero with assistance from artificial intelligence, based on what was published by the cited outlet. El Notero did not conduct its own reporting on this event.
