There was a time ago a young lawyer from Estella (Navarra) who, being a significant leader of the PNV, was also a minister of the Spanish Republic. You will imagine our kind readers, that nothing went well for him or the Republic. When citizens got democracy back to Spain in 1977, he was a senator in a coalition of the PSOE-PSN with the PNV itself in Navarra. What we are going to. He said one very interesting thing, although we never voted for him or the PNV: "He who pursues an impossible, gets just the opposite." What a great phrase, and what a great Navarrese. Why do we say this? Because the previous Government of Navarra pursued an impossible issue in Basque and found just the opposite.

Thus, the UGT of Navarra entrusted us to make a Resource. And the sentence of the TSJ of Navarra has just been known, which estimated its correct and logical claims regarding an attempt at discrimination and an attack on equal opportunities attempted by the Executive of Uxue Barkos - composed of Geroa Bai, Bildu, Podemos e IU- when approving the Regional Decree 103/2017 of November 15, which regulates the use of Basque in the public administrations of Navarra, its public bodies and dependent public law entities.

It is necessary to remember that in the Community there are three linguistic zones established under the Foral Law 18/1986: a Basque, a mixed and a non-Basque zone, attending to the sociolinguistic reality of each zone. This provides for the well-known Basque Law, and even the LORAFNA, which is more or less, as our Constitutional Court would say, what in other places in our country would be called the Statute of Autonomy.

Well, the previous Government of Navarra decreed that in the mixed zone and in the non-Basque-speaking area, Basque should be valued as a merit of 7% of the score for access to posts of the Regional Administration through competition-opposition and 6 % in the provision of posts by merit contest. In this regard, the Superior Court of Navarra has annulled the articles of the merited Decree with this argument, among others: "The imperative application of the valuation of Basque as a merit for any job that does not have a mandatory profile in the mixed zone and services Central entails discrimination in the provision of positions in the Public Service that do not correspond to the principles of rationality and proportionality ... in view of the functions to be performed and the sociolinguistic reality of the corresponding territorial scope. "

What the previous Government of Navarra intended was to favor Basque-speaking people for access to the Foral Administration in areas where Basque is spoken in a very minority. In the mixed zone, it is mainly used by 2.15% of the population; and in the non-Basque-speaking zone, 0.44%, according to the data of the reports in cars. That is to say, by an exercise of unmotivated voluntarism it was intended to incorporate some percentages of valuation for access to the Foral Administration, paying attention to the principle of proportionality in relation to the criterion of functionality and rationality, lacking any justification.

In short, by the way it was almost impossible for a person who did not speak Basque to access the Regional Administration. Or, what is the same, it was a full-fledged discrimination for the vast majority of Navarre. UGT could not allow this, as did the majority of the population.

Another key element of the decree appealed is everything related to relations with citizens, image, notices and publications, which sought to impose notifications and communications, as well as official writings and forms, as well as office signs, uniforms, vehicles and Bilingual road signs, among others, that the Court has declared null and void. What the previous Executive tried was to impose a bilingualism in the aforementioned matters , omitting the zoning established by the Basque Law. Issue that is meaningless, knowing the sociolinguistic reality of Navarra. The ruling says in this regard that language is a right of the citizen and not of the Administration.

The TSJ of Navarra states that the linguistic regime of the actions of the central services should not be adapted to its geographical location, but to the recipient of its action in each case, according to the linguistic area. The determining factor - the parameter of legality and, of course, common sense - is the right of the citizen, as configured in the Basque Law. The scope of such an frustrated attempt is extremely important, as it would involve putting the supposed political rights or interests of the Government in turn to the rights of citizens.

In short, we wanted to impose a de facto language on very sensitive matters, subliminally trying to impose by way of de facto, not to promote, ignoring or omitting the rights of the majority of citizens who do not know or speak Basque, producing Great discrimination.

It is known that for nationalist formations the language, in this case Euskera, is a key element to appeal to the differential fact with respect to the whole of Spain, and thus to articulate discourses that endorse their political positions. The claim, desire or political objective of Basque nationalism to group Navarra with the Basque Autonomous Community to subsequently seek independence from Spain is known. For this, Basque is used as a uniforming element is essential. And, in this field, some of us are not going to play or participate.

We consider that Basque is a cultural heritage of Navarra and a language of the Foral Community. And, of course, it must be cultivated and promoted. But undoubtedly what cannot be done is to impose it with criteria of clear political bias that discriminate and attack the equal opportunities of the vast majority of Navarre and Navarre.

Let's protect Basque, defend Basque, but above all we live together all Navarrese regardless of the language we use. And let's oppose discrimination.

Nobody wants to run so much. Let's be sensible, let the citizens decide the future of Basque in Navarra. We will talk what the Navarrese want. Nobody impose anything on us, please. For the promotion, everything that is necessary, that we are here and will be; but for the imposition we are also and will be, but against.

We finished as we started, with the appointment and with the question: "Why did you want to discriminate?" And finally: "Live and let live."

Juan José Lizarbe Baztán and Roberto Jiménez Alli are lawyers.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Navarre
  • PNV
  • Spain
  • constitutional Court
  • UGT
  • Bildu
  • We can
  • PSOE
  • IU

Turn of the page The thousand and one faces of Sánchezstein

Turn of the page: Sanchez's frog jump

Editorial Pluralism and freedom against the totalitarianism of Bildu