Amazing, but true, what we've heard after Adolfo Suárez's death. Although I was not surprised, most of the things I said surprised me. It was no surprise that whites and blacks had come together to reflect on Suárez, but they had heard a poor critical reflection. There is no doubt that official history has triumphed and with it, once again, the praise of the Transition and the Monarchy.

Who chose Suárez? And why? The official story says that it was built by the king with the intention of leading Spain towards democracy. Facts and reasonable interpretation mean something else: The departure of Spain from the dictatorship required an approachable political process. That did not require a high-level politician, but a mediocre. He was found at the heart of the regime, the leader of the National Movement, in Falange, Suárez, according to the Prosecutor’s Office. Its role was clear: to carry out political reform and to organise free elections. It did everything with the legalization of the PCE and, in addition, reinforced the Bourbon and Monarchy dynasty and consolidated the hegemony of the Catholic Church. All this under the threat of the army and of a new dictatorship, as we know.

As for the territoriality of the State and the nations, it cannot be denied that the Constitution opened a new path and, consequently, the Statutes of Autonomy of Catalonia and the Basque Country were approved, recognizing broad competences in many areas, although the full freedom of these nations was not contemplated. But then the “fun” ended and concerns and doubts began to emerge, that is, if the “democratic process” was not too far away.

Some believe that Suárez started flying on his own. It seems that he realized his ability and was willing to do more than he was “asked,” or that he really believed that what he did was done well. But they didn't allow it. Apparently, he had a clear order and had no choice but to obey it. Then, he was pushed to resign – I have no doubt about it. And everything that has come next is clear: important setbacks in some respects.

First, the coup d ' état of 23 February 1981. We will never know exactly how it happened, but it is clear that from then on they wanted to draw attention to those who ruled. That the “crazy” that had been there until then were not going to be admitted and it was over.
And that's it, yeah. Just one example: The LOAPA was approved in 1982, when the PSOE was in the Government of Spain, according to UCD. The shameful LOAPA, the Constitutional Court, recognised a year later – more than five years ago it took to issue such resolutions – that its core was unconstitutional. And since then, on the pretext of equality for all citizens, they want to bring together the competences of nations and other territories, or almost.

What about the truth, justice and reparation that people who have suffered so much suffering as a result of the military coup of 1936 deserve? In general, the Amnesty Act, adopted by agreement between Suárez and the other parties, ended up wrecking this suffering.

I mean, collecting very briefly and not being able to be more subjective, my idea of transition. Adolfo Suárez is neither a cursed nor a hero. But I must condemn a tremendous manipulation that has been used to whitewash parties, people and responsibilities – and not Suárez, by the way – some images that have been broadcast these days.