THE Spanish government has defended its former foreign minister over allegations of dirty tricks involving a claim that he gave “unconstitutional orders” to its sacked consul to Edinburgh.
Miguel Angel Vecino, formerly the consul to Scotland, Northern Ireland and the north of England, was dismissed from his Scottish posting last year after he said Spain would not veto an independent Scotland joining the EU.
He later said that Josep Borrell – then Spain’s foreign minister but now the EU’s top diplomat – had given him orders that went against the Spanish constitution.
In papers supporting his claim against the government for unfair dismissal from his Edinburgh post, Vecino said Borrell had halted a visit to the Scottish Parliament by an all-party delegation from the Catalan Parliament last year, to avoid a Catalan presence in Scotland ahead of the Spanish General Election.
He said this was motivated by the desire to prevent “any electoral damage to the Pedro Sanchez government”.
“It’s at least playing dirty,” Vecino said at the time.
READ MORE: Spain asks for Clara Ponsati to be extradited from Scotland
He added that the minister had gone on to block a visit by the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce to Barcelona, and another by a delegation of Catalan businesspeople to Scotland, “with the aim of Catalan entrepreneurs not being in touch with the Scots”.
The pro-Basque independence party EH Bildu, also became involved with its MP Jon Inarritu asking a series of parliamentary questions over the “unconstitutional orders” claims and, whether or not Spain’s foreign ministry intended investigating the issue.
However, the Spanish government has now backed Borrell, denying that “instructions, let alone orders, which are contrary to the constitution”, had been issued.
It also highlighted that among the consuls’ duties was “the promotion of Spanish economic interests where there is no commercial office”, and claimed that those “received by the Consul General of Spain in Edinburgh were of this type”.
Inarritu posted the Spanish government’s response on Twitter, and said that if they were of an “economic” nature, the question had to be asked what they actually were.
This was mainly because, as the ex-consul had noted, Borrell was also responsible for blocking the Edinburgh Chamber visit to Barcelona, and that by a delegation of Catalan businesspeople to Scotland, “so that Catalan entrepreneurs had no contact with their Scottish counterparts”.
He said such instructions would be within the economic sphere, but hardly in line with the spirit or letter of the Spanish constitution.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel