The Tenerife Historical Memory Association, along with opposition groups and specialists, has condemned the Cabildo’s proposal to rename the monument dedicated to Franco. Canarian Coalition and PP declared this weekend that they intend to present a motion at the forthcoming plenary session to redefine the sculpture as a Monument for Concord, transforming it into “a space of memory that fosters peace and understanding among citizens.”
“Concord for whom? For all those who vanished on July 18, 1936 and in the aftermath of the dictatorship? Does it signify the harmony of the families left without brothers, parents, or children?” questions the president of the Association for the Recovery of the Historical Memory of Tenerife, Mercedes Pérez Schwartz, expressing her disappointment and describing the proposal as “unacceptable.” She reminds this publication that the Technical Commission of Historical Memory previously approved a catalogue of remnants in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, concluding that this sculpture could not be redefined, with only Mayor José Manuel Bermúdez (CC) voting against it.
Mercedes Pérez Schwartz indicates that the association is seeking legal counsel to halt the proposed redefinition by the Tenerife Cabildo. She also recalls that it was the Santa Cruz de Tenerife City Council, which was then under Bermúdez’s leadership, that commissioned a report from the University of La Laguna that similarly concluded there were no artistic merits to preserve the monument.
The coordinator of the Catalogue of Francoist Relics in Santa Cruz de Tenerife and an Art History lecturer at ULL, Maisa Navarro, has conveyed to Canarias Ahora that it is “indecent” to propose such a redefinition. She emphasises that the Cabildo lacks competence in this matter and that a ruling from June mandates the island corporation to initiate a file, as the Canary Islands Heritage Law requires this preliminary step to gather sufficient reports. “However, it is merely an administrative matter,” she clarifies.
Navarro also reminded the EFE agency that “these declarations regarding the use of the term concord represent yet another affront.” “They present themselves as if they were representatives of the victims. What gives them the authority to determine that the solution is to label it a monument to concord?” she questioned. Navarro further described it as “a humiliation to the victims” and a bid to “involve civil society in unlawful actions” by disregarding current legislation.
The Art History professor reiterates to this publication the reasons why the monument should not be redefined and what features should be removed as they contradict “historical truth.” These include the foundational elements of the sculpture (the representation of the island of Tenerife), the ‘Dragon Rapide’, the aircraft Franco used to travel from the Canary Islands to Morocco to initiate the coup; the depiction of Franco “as a medieval crusader”, clad in cape and sword, alongside the nine shields of the provincial judicial parties indicating “legal support for the Civil War as just and legitimate.”
The PSOE has voiced strong criticism of this resolution, lamenting that it is adopted without awaiting the conclusion of the file regarding its declaration as an Asset of Cultural Interest (BIC) or otherwise. The president of the Socialist Group in the Tenerife Cabildo, Pedro Martín, has drawn attention to the fact that “during the last term, we commissioned studies from the University of La Laguna and the Historical Heritage Technical Unit of the Cabildo. The outcome was that it lacks exceptional artistic values,” he asserted.
Pedro Martín expresses dismay that CC and PP “have already announced their support for maintaining Franco’s statue, without waiting for the experts’ conclusions.
Critique of the City Council Furthermore
The mayor of Santa Cruz de Tenerife, from the Canary Coalition has also voiced discontent regarding this proposal to alter the name of the monument. Bermúdez emphasises in a declaration that the sculpture “is municipal property, meaning the City Council is the sole body authorised to amend its name or recontextualise it.”
Bermúdez further argues that “the Cabildo has embarked on a course laid out by justice, which is to initiate the process to declare the Ávalos monument an Asset of Cultural Interest (BIC), a step I fully support. However, the idea of changing the name of a sculpture that belongs to the municipality, which they are unable to do given that the piece is not theirs, appears to me to be pointless.”
“I find it quite surprising that the Cabildo is making decisions concerning municipal assets without consulting the City Council. Similar actions have precedence; the Government of the Canary Islands attempted this, and it ended poorly,” José Manuel Bermúdez remarks in his statement, urging the Cabildo “to engage in discussions with the owner of the sculpture, which is the City Council of Santa Cruz de Tenerife.”
The president of the Tenerife Cabildo, Rosa Dávila, acknowledged this Monday in remarks reported by EFE that the recontextualisation and renaming of the Franco monument in the capital of Tenerife fall under the purview of the Santa Cruz City Council.
When queried about this matter during a visit to the exchange, Rosa Dávila concurred with the views of the capital’s council, although she confirmed that the motion from CC and PP to the plenary session of the Cabildo will proceed as planned, and that a meeting with the mayor of Santa Cruz, José Manuel Bermúdez, will take place this Friday to discuss the issue.
