The position of the Spanish-Land Party on the Treviño question is very clear: “Treviño County is not the most skilled. The county of Treviño belongs to Castile. And all the Castilians of the five communities that make up Castilla-León, unanimously, we could not change from eight centuries of history and culture completely in Spanish. The territory is not ours. We have received it from our ancestors and we must leave it to our descendants, corrected and swollen, never and under any circumstances. The Castilians cannot give up the territory of Treviño, even if we would like to do so. It is not an irrational territorial conflict, a kind of island of Parsley around the Ebro River. Speaking clearly, it’s about valuing our commitment to our land.”

From all this, two important things emerge that underpin the attitude of the Castilian people: the territory dominates, but the will of its inhabitants is absolutely exclusive. And that strong position is shared by the PP and the PSOE, even if it is not said as brazenly as the Spanish Party. I am convinced that the first count of Treviño, Diego Manrique de Lara (1409-1458), would be of the same tenor.

In any case, this has been the way the conquerors act and act. In the east, the legend of Khan's counsel to his son about good governance is well known: “If in your reign you add a land to your territory of dominion, you will be a great Khan. If you don't add or lose an inch, Khan will be mediocre, but well, acceptable. But if you lose an inch of land, even if it's just one, people cursed you and Khan will be bad. So protect your land like your right hand.” It has been a long time since the time of the Khanerris, societies have evolved and in matters relating to politics the human subject is taken first. Unfortunately, however, this is not the case with Treviño.

As you know, the two nested municipalities, Treviño and Arganzón, want to be the eighth block of Álava. They have nothing to do with Burgos, nor with Castilla, nor with its inhabitants, but their main connection is Álava, so they want to integrate politically with Álava.

A consultation on this issue was held on 8 March 1998, led by the then mayors. The purpose of the consultation was to know whether the citizens wanted to make a referendum or not. With a share of 76%, 68% voted in favour of the referendum, 31% against. The authorities of Castilla y León did not accept the consultation.

According to all historical data, the citizens of Treviño have never freely allowed themselves to decide their administrative future, and when they dare to collectively express their will, it has been silenced from power. The Castilian authorities have sought to perpetuate undesired administrative ties by the Treviñeses, building for this a wall of law, the third transitional provision of the Statute of Castile and León, which makes it absolutely impossible to find a solution that respects the will of the Treviñeses.

In view of this situation of blockade, a system of consultation between the Provincial Councils of Burgos and Álava has been created for the improvement of infrastructures and services. But this concertation system is a transitional solution that excludes the legitimate demand of the two municipalities for their integration in Álava from time to time.

In these times, the solution to the Treviño case must be based on the democratic will and the interests of the social majorities of its inhabitants. It is absolutely unthinkable to deny the Treviñeses a legal and democratic route, in which case they are excluded and become secondary citizens. However, the poor Treviñeses are suffering this anomalous situation for a long time. The dignity of the people of Treviño must be respected through dialogue, recognizing the majority will of society. Everything else is to encourage you to avoid the answer.

Before, the Spanish “constitutionalists” said that holding a referendum in Treviño meant giving ETA a say. Since the disappearance of ETA, the Basque sovereign discourse is peaceful, rooted in modernity, but its national demands, such as that of a legal referendum in Treviño, are understood as a challenge or a threat to Spanish democracy. And the response of state nationalism is always the same: dogmas repeated as mantra, carved at the end of the twentieth century. Among them, the most widely used is the strict defense of existing legislation, which often confuses the rule of law with the rule of law, and which, moreover, determines the deeply legalistic conception of democracy.

As you can see, democracy and the rule of law are mixed together. Democracy is not only about complying with the rules, it is also an ideal of collective self-government, according to which political decisions should be based on the priorities of citizenship. The Treviño conflict creates tension between the principle of legality and the democratic principle. In Europe, when territorial or state conflicts occur, a commitment is sought between the two principles, while in Spain the principle of legality is imposed.

Final thoughts. The Treviño question is not a problem exclusive to the Treviñeses, but also affects the Alaveses and, by extension, the whole of the Basque Country. It now seems that another political era is opening up in Spain... Resolving the Treviño question through a legal referendum would be a good test of the Basque political parties to test the reliability of the state government.

It's time. Let Treviño decide!

Jesús Pérez de Viñaspre Churruca