Characters: JOURNALIST, POLICEMAN 1, POLICEMAN 2, POST DEPENDENT
ACT I
Scene in bright colors. Although the theme may suggest it, neither the setting nor the costumes are in black and white. Madrid path. It is a Sunday in September. Dozens of people are moving in all directions. Next to a corner, in an alley that leaves the main road, there is a solitary stand. It is presided over by a flag with Franco’s shield and another with the symbol of the Falange. On the table you can see the goods for sale: key rings, lighters, t-shirts and all kinds of objects with messages and images that exalt the dictatorship and fascism. There are also other “souvenirs” with insulting slogans against the current government. There are not many who come to buy, but the youth of some of them stands out. Next to the post, leaning against the wall, are two municipal police officers (POLICE 1 AND POLICE 2) who seem to protect the post. A JOURNALIST enters the scene, sees what is happening and heads towards the police.
JOURNALIST: Hello.
POLICE 1: Hello.
JOURNALIST: I am a journalist. You will forgive me, but displaying these flags is against the law.
POLICEMAN 1 (suddenly): Like in a stand up there with a republican flag or in many others that have t-shirts with Che Guevara’s face. We allow everyone to express themselves as they wish.
JOURNALIST (a little surprised): The Republican flag or the Che T-shirt do not violate any law.
POLICE 1: The Republican flag is unconstitutional.
REPORTER: No, sorry. It’s not. What you’re telling me is serious. I’m telling you this because I’m going to write information about this place and I’m going to quote your words.
POLICEMAN 1 (uncomfortable and increasingly angry): Quote me whatever you want. But what law does the Francoist flag violate?
JOURNALIST: The law on democratic memory.
POLICEMAN 1 (with a disdainful gesture): Yes. A law that some people have made.
JOURNALIST (more surprised): Excuse me. This law, like all the others, was approved by the Congress of Deputies. Does that mean that you are not obliged to comply with laws passed by a government that you do not like?
POLICEMAN 1: I didn’t say that!
JOURNALIST: Yes, he said it.
POLICE 1: Look, in Tirso de Molina there is a post with communist flags with the hammer and sickle and many other things.
JOURNALIST: Yes, but neither the Democratic Memory Law nor any other law prohibits the display of this flag. If instead of Franco’s, this post had an ETA flag, would you allow it?
POLICEMAN 1 (hesitates for a moment, visibly uncomfortable): Well, we’ll see.
JOURNALIST: Well, you should delete it because it is also prohibited by law.
POLICE OFFICER 1: Does this flag bother you? Are you going to report it?
JOURNALIST: The important thing is not whether it bothers me or not… it does… it bothers me. I will see if I report it. The important thing is that, according to the law, you must not allow its exhibition.
POLICEMAN 1: I’ll take it back right away.
POLICEMAN 1 takes two steps to turn the corner, says something to the POST CHIEF and he, without asking anything, removes the Francoist flag. The curtain falls.
ACT II
POLICEMAN 1 has the JOURNALIST’s ID card in his hand and writes down his details in a notebook. POLICEMAN 2, the youngest, watches the scene with an obvious expression of anger. The flag with the Phalange shield and the rest of his merchandise continue to be displayed at the station.
REPORTER: Since you insisted on identifying me, which I don’t understand, I’m going to write down your license plate number.
POLICEMAN 1: Do whatever you want.
REPORTER: Are you here to protect the position and prevent any incidents?
POLICEMAN 1: We are at this corner as we could be over there or up there. This is the area that suits us.
JOURNALIST: Yes.
POLICEMAN 2 (interrupts the conversation): What section of the law says that this flag cannot be flown? Tell me what section and that’s how we all learn.
REPORTER: I don’t remember it right now, but if you want, I’ll look it up for you.
POLICEMAN 2 (provocative): Look for him because you came here to give lessons and you don’t even know the article that you say is being violated.
REPORTER (while checking his cell phone): I’m looking for it and I’m showing it to you, but it’s your superiors who make sure you know the laws that you have to apply. It’s here. Article 35, article 38…
POLICEMAN 1 (while policeman 2 takes the journalist’s cell phone and reads): Now, a law that only punishes some.
JOURNALIST: Are you saying that you don’t have to follow a law if you don’t like it? There are laws that I don’t like, but if Parliament has approved them, I have to respect them, even if I don’t like them.
POLICEMAN 2 (hands the cell phone back to the journalist): And do you think this flag is Franco’s?
JOURNALIST: In my opinion, no. It is the Francoist flag and this position exalts the dictatorship and its leaders.
POLICEMAN 2: This flag is very old.
JOURNALIST: Let’s see, Franco was inspired by earlier symbols, but it was the official flag of his dictatorship.
POLICE 2: This is not the Francoist flag.
JOURNALIST: Yes, they also have the Falange and they sell products that defend Francoism. Isn’t Franco’s face a Francoist symbol?
POLICEMAN 2 (very tense): The flag has already been removed.
JOURNALIST: Yes.
POLICEMAN 2: I’m telling you something. You came here in a very aggressive manner. Next time you approach the police, do it with more respect. It doesn’t matter if you’re a journalist, a waiter or an office worker.
JOURNALIST: Sorry, but it’s not the same. I addressed you as a journalist and not as a citizen. As a citizen, obviously, I’m like a waiter or an office worker, but here I work as a journalist.
POLICE 2: If we had acted with you as a journalist, we would not have been able to tell you anything. We have no right to speak.
JOURNALIST: And they would have had the right, but I identified myself from the first moment as a journalist and I was very polite. I limited myself to explaining to you what is happening.
POLICE 2: I warn you that if you quote us in the article, we will take appropriate action.
JOURNALIST: I will quote them, in accordance with the law. And, in any case, you will have the right to do what you deem appropriate.
POLICE 2: Hello. Enjoy the trail.
REPORTER: Goodbye.
The JOURNALIST walks away. The scene continues as if nothing had happened. POLICE 1 and POLICE 2 remain in the corner. POSITION DEPENDANT continues to sell his products. The Francoist flag is not in sight. The curtain falls.
ACT III
Small room with two beds. On one of the walls is an old wooden bookcase filled with books. In a corner you can see a cabinet matching the bookcase. The JOURNALIST is seen sitting on one of the beds. He has a laptop on his lap on which he finishes writing a text that he begins to read aloud.
JOURNALIST: I have the feeling, almost the certainty, that if I had presented myself as a simple citizen among others… I would have had many more problems with these two police officers. An image comes to mind: the Francoist flag flying at the post office, while the complainant was detained or with a complaint against him in his wallet. I confess that, despite the supposed protection that my job offers me, I continue to wonder about the final destination of my personal data. The attitude of the agents and the way in which, officially and in front of a journalist, they justified their rejection of the laws “approved by some” arouse concern and a feeling of helplessness in me. It is alarming that at this moment I imagine that my data is being publicly disseminated in the chat of an ultra agitator or on a more private and therefore perhaps more dangerous forum. It is sad to have to write once again that I do not trust the professionalism and impartiality of a good part of our police and military forces. It’s unsettling to have to ask myself more questions.
Was it an anecdote? An isolated event? Or are we facing a generalized, even majority, behavior within the police force of this country? The investigations that we have on the predominant ideology within the army and the security forces of the State go in the second direction. The problem itself is not the ideology of the agents, they are free to think as they want, but their temptation not to apply the laws that “the others” approve and to be particularly harsh in the execution of those that “their own” support. At this point, it is not demographic studies, but the facts that reinforce this suspicion. The lukewarmness with which the fight against the violence provoked by the demonstrations and the extreme right groups is conducted contrasts with the attitude of the police forces during demonstrations of another political nature. An attitude that could be summarized in two specific examples: that “go for them” that the riot police sang, on their way to Catalonia from process and the police discuss praising Hitler and threatening the then mayor of Madrid, Manuela Carmena.
There are many other examples, too many. It may or may not be because I have been studying the 1936 coup and the dictatorship that followed for years, but I can’t help but imagine what would happen in Spain if at some point there were an attempted coup like that or the one that Trump led, much less long ago, in the United States. I think about what those two agents and most of the police and military forces would do. I imagine, I think, and I break out in a cold sweat.
There is silence in the room. REPORTER looks up from the screen and stares into infinity. The curtain falls.
