angered the Government of Aragon, which has described his words as “intolerable contempt”, when he stated that “what cannot be is to say that” [en referencia a la presentación de su disco Lux en el MNAC]and that “whoever says this has to go to a doctor.” Jorge Español, Villanueva de Sijena’s lawyer in the litigation over the Romanesque murals on display in Barcelona and who tried to paralyze Rosalía’s act, has already warned that he will file a lawsuit against Serra.
In the last half year, Serra has avoided lavishing himself before the media. On Monday he broke that silence and, at an event to present the expansion of the museum and during various interviews, he once again alleged the impossibility of moving the 12th century paintings, despite the sentence that obligates him, questioning the arguments put forward by the Government of Aragon and the Sijena City Council. The general director of Aragonese Culture, Pedro Olloqui, has called a press conference this Tuesday to respond to the head of the MNAC, of whom he has indicated a “disturbing mood.”
Olloqui has also reported that the Huesca court that decides compliance with the sentence has summoned the parties – still without a date – to elucidate the differences between the two schedules presented so far for the return of the paintings, although Villanueva de Sijena has not yet delivered its proposal. The Aragonese Government considers that seven months of work are sufficient, while .
The gesture of the judge who instructs the execution of the sentence represents a “wake-up call” to the Catalan institutions so that the technical works are respected, but she has hoped to reach an agreement because it is only a matter of “weeks of difference” in the deadlines for dismantling and moving the mural complex, which should not be “an obstacle” to compliance with the judicial resolution.
Olloqui has assured that, after the Supreme Court’s ruling, there are three elements that are already “res judicata”: the Aragonese ownership of the mural complex, the need for the paintings to “return home” and the viability of the return. Regarding this last issue, Olloqui has insisted that “it was resolved in the ruling” after being the subject of debate in the judicial procedure, in which “a significant number of experts” participated representing all the parties and “all of them admitted that the mural paintings can be moved and reintegrated into the monastery without any problem.” The Catalan technicians who participated argue that they maintained that everything can be moved, but they highlighted the damage that could occur in the case of the transfer.
“How is it possible that at this time the Catalan institutions and the director of the MNAC reopen this debate, questioning the viability to which there was no procedural opposition?” Olloqui asked, arguing that this questioning is “exclusively political” because it is only pending to be fulfilled and executed, which is “what the director of the MNAC should focus on.” Furthermore, he stressed that Serra himself participated in the court hearing.
“Procedural filibustering”
The Aragonese head of Culture has referred to in which he assures that he will call a competition for companies to carry out the transfer: “What if the time has come? The time has already arrived as a result of a judicial ruling from the Supreme Court; we just have to comply with it.” Therefore, he must “decisively” begin work to return the paintings “without further delay or procedural filibuster.”
The head of Aragonese Culture has also rejected that the Aragonese technicians are going to cut the paintings “with a saw” to dismantle them into 72 parts: “This ridicule makes no sense whatsoever,” he pointed out, since the mural paintings “arrived in many more than 72 fragments”, which on the other hand are the same as those used at the MNAC for their assembly on the frames. Furthermore, in the joints between these 72 fragments “there are no remains of original paint” and they are made in areas that are restorations made throughout the 20th century, so “the disassembly does not affect at all” the original set.
Olloqui has also defended that the photographs provided by his technical team, which reflected “a strong contamination” in the surroundings of the paintings, with the presence even of cigarette butts, are in format rawwho is “unmanipulated” and has not received “treatment of any kind.” Finally, he has rejected the arguments of the MNAC regarding the appraisal and insurance of the pieces: “If the Twin Towers were insurable, how are the Sijena mural paintings not insurable?” he questioned, also asking if it is a budgetary problem.
Español, for its part, has announced its intention to sue for insults and damage to honor against Serra. In statements to EFE, the lawyer explained that at no point in the process did he refer to the possibility of “cutting” or “squeezing” the paintings into pieces, and he understood that the director of the MNAC incurred “mockery” or “discredit” against him by proposing that he should turn to a doctor, “in clear reference to a psychiatrist,” he added. He has announced that he will file a criminal complaint for damage to honor against Serra, from whom he will demand, he highlighted, “strong compensation.”
