It is quite normal for Xavier Antich (La Seu d'Urgell, 1962) to take off his glasses, keep a few seconds of silence and rub his eyes with both hands when asked about civil disobedience. He has theorized about it in several books and for an interview he is forced to do an ultrasynthesis. The president of Omnium is opposed to the demonstration of December 6 that the ANC has called to protest the reform of the Penal Code -despite the fact that he shares the fund-, he dares to comment on embezzlement and is concerned about the low social use of Catalan. The organization works so that the whole of independence comes together again. There are obvious difficulties, now. But Antich wants to correct Thomas Bernard, who said that "each individual is a virtuoso of his instrument; all together, an unbearable cacophony".
Once the reform of the Penal Code was made public, you said that the new configuration of public disorder is a step forward in the persecution of protest and that it criminalizes political dissent.
Let's get back to it. It was not an improvised position. It was the result of analyzes and legal consultations. It is necessary to repeal the crime of sedition, but in no way can we sacrifice fundamental rights along the way. We celebrate the elimination of sedition, but we are concerned that it goes hand in hand with the expansion of the crime of public disorder.
But you were also not to criticize to some extent the suppression of sedition. You said that "it does not respond to all reprisals"...
Òmnium was the first organization in Catalonia to denounce the crime of sedition and to demand its repeal. The appeal we presented to the Constitutional Court after the Supreme Court's ruling on 1-O demands the declaration of the unconstitutionality of the crime. When the Constitutional way is denied to us, the basis of the appeal to Strasbourg is based on this illegitimacy. There is no doubt that the crime of sedition must be removed from the Penal Code.
Has Omnium spoken to the Government of Aragon to reformulate the crime of public disorder?
We have spoken with the Government, with all the political agents, with all the social movements. Our job is to find the maximum consensus. The repeal of sedition does not respond to the 4,200 reprisals nor to the need to deal with the democratic resolution of the political conflict.
But has ERC committed with you to amend the reform of the crime of public disorder?
The processing in Congress is very important because it will allow what we demand from all the agents involved: that anything that touches on the current crime of public disorder guarantees the exercise of fundamental rights and does not criminalize the right to protest . Yes, we have done it with the political agents involved, and yes, we have done it with all the social movements that could be affected by the legislative initiative.
Can you put the names and surnames of these political agents?
We have been talking with Esquerra, Junts, the CUP and the commons. They all acknowledge that nothing is closed and confirm that they want to apply political pressure so that the proposal to expand public disorder is amended.
Does Omnium agree, then, with this crime as it is now in effect?
The current one should only allow more for the exercise of the right to protest. The crime in force has largely endorsed the persecution of independence. There are still more than 500 open cases due to a restrictive interpretation of the Penal Code. Staying as it is now is no solution, nor is increasing penalties or introducing notions that are subjective and arbitrary, such as intimidation or crowds or suitability. They are extremely vague concepts. On September 20, 2017, in front of the Department of Economy, it was considered an intimidation of the public order forces, in the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Do you think that the end of judicialization is closer with the governing PSOE in Madrid?
It is difficult to assess this with statements of intent alone. We are governed by what we have explicitly on the table.
Do they support the demonstration called for the 6th by the ANC against the redesign of the crime of aggravated public disorder?
We celebrate the repeal of sedition and demand the collective solution of amnesty and self-determination and address the case of the more than 4,000 retaliated against. But although we share the final objective with the ANC in many respects and their concern for the expansion of public disorder, we do not agree because we see with great concern some drifts that arise from it. We are in favor of mobilizing in a network, in a consensual way. But the demonstration on the 6th Òmnium does not support it, because it is a call that promoted the Assembly to which we are then asked to join. Relationships are fluid and very constant. I wouldn't say daily, but practically weekly. There is a stable bilateral. There are differences in the ways of working. We will not drag anyone along and Òmnium will not contribute to the confrontation between different agents of the independence movement and to doing anti-politics.
Do they think they have massive support from independence? At some point in your September 11th speech you were booed.
They whistled at us for some of the issues that are part of Omnium's deepest convictions, which is that there is no one left for us here. The movement is plural and there is a diversity of points of view and our job is to act as a bridge between different sensibilities. If this causes any discrepancy, it will be a shame, but it is part of Omnium's DNA.
Do you think that the Government is paralyzed with regard to the goal of independence?
We are concerned about the paralysis the movement is in after October 2017. We are in a cycle of increasing demobilization, widespread discouragement and disorientation. This cycle does not allow progress. All the advocacy action of Òmnium works for the possibility of opening a new cycle, precisely to get out of this paralysis, which does not only affect the Government, institutions or parties, but the entire movement. And with regard to repression, if October 2017 represents the moment of maximum accumulation of strength in Catalonia in the last 300 years, what follows is a repressive cycle of the Spanish State that has no comparison in the last four decades of democracy.
And do you see progress in the field of dejudicialization in the PSOE-ERC negotiation?
We see that at some moments initiatives are taken that are effectively done to remove the resolution of the political conflict from the courts, but they are very timid and very contradictory. We cannot celebrate any of the initiatives completely because practically all of them go hand in hand with some element that worries us.
Do the agreements between the ERC and the PSOE paralyze independence?
What must contribute to moving the movement forward are various initiatives in four fields: parties, institutions, civil society and citizenship. Whatever happens in any of the movements that allow the unblocking in the relationship between the governments of Catalonia and Spain, be welcome, as long as and when it contributes to progress.
Does Omnium dare to talk about a reform of embezzlement?
The use that the Spanish State is making of the crime of embezzlement is also not comparable to what happens in consolidated democratic systems in the rest of Europe. With the crime of embezzlement - which is designed to pursue cases of corruption, personal enrichment and misuse of public funds for strictly personal goals - convictions are being produced without this having consequences. But on the other hand we see that the crime of embezzlement is used to pursue independence when there is no personal enrichment, but the exercise of fundamental rights. In a few days, high-ranking Government officials will face a trial for embezzlement with totally disproportionate penalties, simply to fulfill the will of the public. It is a perversion in the use of embezzlement.
So for 1-O was there embezzlement?
No. In addition, the Minister of Finance at the time [Cristóbal Montoro] acknowledged that not a single public euro had been spent to organize the referendum.
In September you offered to coordinate the creation of a new strategic framework or General Staff of independence with more actors than in 2017. They expected that there would already be joint meetings in December.
It is not stopped. Absolutely not. Recognition between the various agents of the independence movement and mutual respect must be restored. Since September 12, Omnium has not stopped working for a single day. And we are working with other voices and sensitivities that should be incorporated when defining the strategic future of the country, and this happens in the first instance through organized youth. We cannot wait for another confrontation with the State to invite the young, but they must participate in the strategic reflection first. But we also work with the business fabric of the country, with the historical trade union tradition and the volunteers who work in various organizations, that is to say, the Third Sector.
Is it in the field of political parties where everything is worse?
It is not lost on anyone that the current political situation is characterized by a phenomenon that is not exclusive to Catalonia: extreme confrontation. This erodes the possibility of reaching great agreements, because in the essence of all democratic systems there is the recognition of pluralism. It is being difficult, because the elements on the table contribute more to confrontation than to conciliation.
You have theorized about civil disobedience. Is it an instrument for when dialogue has run out, or vice versa, a means to achieve dialogue?
Civil disobedience is never a goal. It is always a legitimate instrument that allows progress in democratic systems where democratic systems fail. In Catalonia and globally, they fail to convey the voices of the majority of citizens. We will never give up. And it is not a radical position: the defense from Hannah Arendt, who is a liberal philosopher, to Jürgen Habermas, who is the great theoretician of social democracy in the second half of the 20th century. It means not complying with manifestly unjust laws in order to exercise fundamental rights when they are explicitly prohibited.
Is independence more reactive than proactive? Can the movement be reactivated without someone replacing it, as perhaps the PP does when it governs in Madrid?
For Omnium, the focus is not on Spain. It is in Catalonia. The independence movement in the last twelve years has not only been reactive, but also proactive. He has repeatedly put instruments on the table that would allow progress in the democratic resolution of the political conflict. And this culminates with the referendum proposal. But since November 2017 it has been more reactive than proactive, due to all this repressive machinery deployed.
What would happen if the PP were to govern again?
The legitimacy of what is set in motion from the independence movement must be relatively indifferent to who occupies the government of the State. It must advance with the PSOE and the commons in the Spanish Government or with the PP and Vox.
And with the Catalan language?
It clearly wouldn't be the same. The PSC is currently and still within the great linguistic consensus, not only in Catalan society, but also in Parliament. He has promoted and supported parliamentary initiatives that should prevent the application of the sentence of 25% Spanish in classrooms. One of the ideological backbones of parties such as the PP - direct legacy of Francoism - or Vox - direct apology for Francoism - is the attack on the Catalan language. On the other hand, the PSC is part of a historical Catalanist tradition. We will never promote the discourse of "everyone is equal".
You are running a campaign to promote the Catalan language.
The data on the decline in percentages in the social use of the language are of great concern to us. We took it so seriously that we mobilized a whole set of sociolinguists to analyze the state of the situation in the field of education and leisure, in the field of business and work, in the field of the media and in that of demographic plurality. We are not satisfied with the current situation and we do not remain lamenting - crying is of no use - and we want to reverse the situation and the social decline of the Catalan language. This is why we target very specific actions in very specific areas, which are basically children and young people and newcomers. There are 2.8 million people living and working in Catalonia who were born abroad. Of these, 85% either never speak Catalan or almost never speak it.
Is Omnium in favor of a single official language in Catalonia?
It is a debate that Omnium has not had. We are not legislators. We are concerned about the need to strengthen and strengthen the social use of the Catalan language and we are working on this.
