This is the text of a formal request sent to Partido dos Socialistas de Galicia-PSOE asking them to investigate the conduct of the Alcalde of Negueira de Muñiz. A copy was also sent to PSOE.

A fellow villager said that I would get no response to the request. My view was that he was being over pessimistic. I was wrong; I have not received a response from either organisation.

A year later a local journalist followed this up with PSG-PSOE - she too received no response.

This is a formal request to
Partido dos Socialistas de Galicia-PSOE

to investigate the conduct of
José Manuel Braña Pereda, Alcalde of Negueira de Muñiz

I request that you investigate the conduct of José Manuel Braña Pereda on the following four counts

1) Matters relating to the removal of the illegal Fascist era plaque at Ouviaño in Negueira de Muñiz

a1/ In December of 2009 I asked the alcalde when the illegal Fascist era plaque at the public fountain in Ouviaño, Negueira de Muñiz was to be removed. He replied that the wording of the plaque was 'ironic' and therefore there was no need to remove the plaque.

a2/ This response was dishonest. I find it offensive that on the first occasion I met the alcalde he chose to lie to me, more importantly he was deliberately avoiding his legal responsibility by this lie.

b1/ In May 2011 the alcalde approached me seeking votes for the election. I informed him that I had spoken to dozens of people in the area and that not one person had agreed with his 'irony' story re. the plaque.

b2/ I told him that with the exception of three or four who made no comment all of the others stated that the wording was not and never had been 'ironic', but was offensive, and that the plaque was illegal and should be removed. (Two of those who did not make a comment I now know to be a well-known Fascist and his wife.)

b3/ He did not contest this statement, but asked me what I wanted to be done. I said the Fascist symbol had to be removed, so too the text relating to the Fascist era alcalde. In addition a new (large) plaque explaining the 'irony' - this to be written in gallego. Also a smaller plaque with translations of the gallego text in castilliano, english, french and german.

b4/ The alcalde agreed to this, and we shook hands on this agreement. Subsequently the alcalde has sought to suggest that with language difficulties things get lost in translation; in respect of this agreement I made a point of reiterating all the elements of the agreement, and he understood well enough to ask why the use of gallego, and why the particular sequence of translated languages.

c1/ July 2011 saw the 75th anniversary of the start of the Civil War. On the wednesday preceding that anniversary councillor José Antonio Fernández Cancio told me that the work on the plaque promised by the alcalde in May would not happen because of lack of funds. I offered to remove the plaque free of charge, thus saving the council the cost of its legal obligation and/or the cost of the work promised by the alcalde. This offer was accepted, and we shook hands on this agreement. In law this agreement constitutes a contract.

c2/ On the following day, 14th July, in line with this contract I removed the plaque. Later that day José Manuel Braña Pereda issued a denuncia in relation to the work.

d1/ In August 2011 I asked the alcalde why he has issued the denuncia. He claimed it was because I was being violent. He had the grace to look ashamed when I stated that he was talking nonsense, he did not however apologize for this insulting lie. (As with the meeting in December 2009 this response was both dishonest and offensive.) I repeated my question re. the denuncia but he did not reply.

e1/ In September 2011 I again asked the alcalde why he had issued the denuncia. He said it was because of money, i.e. the cost of replacing the plaque. I stated that the plaque was illegal, and he agreed that this was so. He did not appear to understand the illogicality of seeking money to erect an illegal plaque.

f1/ In September 2012 the alcalde denied that he had ever acknowledged the plaque as being illegal (re. 1e1/ above). He also denied making the agreement related in 1b3/ and 1b4/ above. Later, in a TV interview he acknowledged the plaque was illegal.

2) Matters relating to the issuing of the denuncia

a1/ As stated in 1c1/ above, I agreed a contract to remove the illegal Fascist plaque at the public fountain in Ouviaño, Negueira de Muñiz. Shortly after I had finished the removal of the plaque I met councillor José Antonio Fernández Cancio. He asked if I had removed the plaque. I stated that I had and showed him before and after photos on my camera. I had wine and glasses with me and we drank a toast celebrating the removal of the plaque.

b1/ Some time after this the denuncia was issued. Recent information has come to me suggesting that a complaint was made, presumably to the alcalde, by the grand-daughter of a well known Fascist. If this is the case I find it unacceptable that a denuncia should have been issued in response to a politically motivated complaint WHEN NO ATTEMPT WHATSOEVER WAS MADE TO VERIFY THE ACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

c1/ At the time the contract was agreed two witnesses were present. Later in the day a further conversation took place between myself and councillor José Antonio Fernández Cancio to arrange what time he would visit my house the next day to deliver the power hammer with which I was to remove the plaque. During this conversation a further four witnesses were present. All four were within earshot, and in my opinion were likely to have understood the topic of conversation.

c2/ All six witnesses rely on employment with the council for part or all of their income. There must exist the possibility of passive intimidation limiting the willingness of these witnesses to testify.

c3/ The two witnesses to the contract agreement are, I believe man and wife. Between the date when I identified these witnesses to the court and the date when they were due to give evidence councillor José Antonio Fernández Cancio physically assaulted the husband.*

3) Matters relating to other illegal Fascist plaques, etc in Negueira de Muñiz

a1/ It has been brought to my attention that there are other illegal Fascist artefacts in Negueira de Muñiz. As the alcalde is well aware of his legal obligations in this respect why is he still in breach of those legal obligations?

a2/ How many of these offensive and illegal objects are there; what are their locations; what steps are being taken to have these objects removed, and to thus bring the Council into line with its legal obligations?

a3/ Has the alcalde compiled a complete list of these illegal Fascist artefacts, and a timetable for their removal - if not why not?

4) Matters relating to the electoral register

a1/ I have been told that the permanent residents of Negueira de Muñiz form only a minority of the electorate.

a2/ I have been told that a perception exists that if only the permanent residents votes were counted the alcalde would not be elected.

a3/ It has been suggested to me that the reason the alcalde issued the denuncia (1c2/, 1d1/, 1e1/ and 2b1/ above) was to placate non-resident voters whose votes he relies on.

b1/ Has the electoral register for Negueira de Muñiz been kept up to date? Are all the non-resident voters in Negueira de Muñiz elections entitled to vote here?

May I request that any investigation into these issues be conducted by persons not connected with the party in Negueira de Muñiz, Fonsagrada, or their neighbouring areas.

Cliff Torrents Colman
Wednesday, 3rd October 2012

* At the trial José Antonio Fernández Cancio claimed that I had misled him over the use of the hammer, claimed not to have met with me and celebrated the removal of the plaque, and claimed not to have assaulted the witness. This assault is common knowledge in Negueira de Muñiz.

The assaulted man and his wife both gave false evidence. Another 'council' witness knowing of the assault also gave false evidence.