of the
European Convention on Human Rights
1/000There is no law forbidding the removal of illegal Fascist plaques.
2/00The Law of Historical Memory requires the removal of Fascist plaques from public places. In the case of the plaque in question, one made of sand and cement plastered to a wall, its removal inevitably included the destruction of the plaque.
2a/00Accomplishing the intention of the law cannot be defined as 'vandalism'.
3/00In removing, and therefore destroying the plaque no incidental damage occurred, and no consequential damage occurred. Therefore no harm has been done.
3a/00Of the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations one of the most basic is that when no harm has been done there can be no case to answer.
4/00In summation; The intention of the Law has been achieved, no incidental or consequential damage has occurred, no harm has been done, therefore there is no case to answer.
4a/00To construe the above as 'vandalism' is perverse, and clearly subverts the Law of Historical Memory.
4b00The denuncia against me has no validity as defined by the norms of justice throughout the civilised nations.
4c/00Consequently the 'judicial' process to which I was subjected has no validity as defined by the norms of justice throughout the civilised nations.
4d/00Consequently the punishment attendant on the 'judicial' process to which I was subjected has no validity as defined by the norms of justice throughout the civilised nations.
5/00The plaque was illegal as defined by the Law of Historical Memory, and was rendered illegal the moment the Law of Historical Memory came into force.
5a/00To argue that the plaque is not illegal until such time as those obliged by law to remove it agree that it is illegal is perverse, and clearly subverts the Law of Historical Memory.
5b/00Even if the perverse, subversive and blatantly illogical argument cited in 5a had any validity it was rendered entirely irrelevant by the Alcalde's agreement that the plaque was illegal. This agreement was made in conversation with me on Wednesday 11th May 2011 - that is more than 2 months before I removed the plaque.
5c/00Under cross-examination in court the Alcalde acknowledged that he had agreed to the illegal nature of the plaque during the conversation cited in 5b. In addition he also stated the plaque had been illegal during a brief interview broadcast on La Sexta Noticias on Friday 21st September 2012.
6/00The 'judicial' process to which I was subjected can only be interpreted as a kangaroo court whose governing 'principle' was "You have been accused by someone in authority, and therefore you are guilty." - all the rest was mere 'theatre'.
6a/00As a kangaroo court it lies in a clear line of descent from the Fascist era, differing only from Fascism in that it was not accompanied by the barbaric violence of the Fascists. The 'small-town bullying' mentality of Fascism was present ('We are in charge and we can do whatever we choose.'), the logic-turned-on-its-head idiocy of Fascism was present ('The illegal object is not illegal'), and the opposite-of-justice of Fascist 'justice' was present ('No harm has been done but you are to be punished anyway.').
7/00To repeat, the 'judicial' process to which I was subjected has no validity as defined by the norms of justice throughout the civilised nations.
Cliff Torrents Colman, April 2014.