The dozens of complaints that the Historical Heritage service of the Cabildo has failed to process and sanction in recent years include one in which the Civil Guard intervened, which more than a year ago reported the "seizure" of two ancient anchors with historical value, after detecting that an individual was trying to sell them on the Internet. However, what was a seizure for an infraction against the Historical Heritage Law, for the Cabildo ended up mysteriously becoming a voluntary "cession" of those anchors by the "owner."
This is reflected in a report by the Heritage lawyer of the Cabildo, prepared to give explanations of what has happened with at least 37 complaints filed by the inspector of this department in the last three years. The report alleges that no files have been opened on any of these complaints due to a lack of technicians, but in the case of the anchors, the lawyer gives another version that has nothing to do with the records drawn up at the time. In fact, she denies that it was a "seizure," despite the fact that this was reflected in the report of the Heritage inspector himself, who collaborated in this intervention with the Nature Protection Detachment (Deprona) of the Civil Guard.
"It is stated in the file that said anchors were not seized by this Cabildo," says the lawyer, who maintains that "said elements were temporarily ceded" to the Island Corporation "by the possessor thereof." To affirm this, the lawyer relies on a decree signed by the president, Pedro San Ginés, on June 10, 2017, two days after Deprona acted. In that decree, San Ginés made no reference to the seizure of the anchors, nor to the fact that the alleged owner was trying to sell them on the Internet, nor to the infraction of the Heritage Law of which the Civil Guard warned, but to a voluntary "cession" by the "owner."
The "owner" claimed that he obtained them from a company that dredged the coast
The person who had those anchors in his possession was a well-known businessman who years ago appeared linked to several legal cases. According to the record drawn up by the Civil Guard after the inspection, he claimed that he had obtained those anchors through "a company that carried out dredging" on the coast of Arrecife and assured that he "was unaware of their archaeological value."
In the record, the agents recorded that they proceeded to "seize" the anchors, as well as to file a complaint against this person for an infraction against the Historical Heritage Law, requesting the Cabildo to proceed "to their precautionary removal in order to guarantee their safeguard." Two days after that intervention, however, San Ginés stated in his decree that the "owner" of the anchors had stated during the inspection his "temporary cession of custody and deposit" to the Cabildo, "in order that a precise and conclusive study of them be carried out as a precautionary measure from the point of view of their patrimonial values."
The president also referred to a document that the alleged offender, to whom he referred to as "owner," apparently would have provided later, giving rise to that decree issued two days later speaking of "cession" and not of seizure. However, that document "was not on file" in the Heritage department on the day the inspection was carried out.
"He did not possess a document that protected the legal origin of the anchors"
The version collected in San Ginés' decree differs from the one offered at the time by the Civil Guard, which sent a statement reporting this intervention and explaining that the anchors had been seized. "Once the seller was located, he admitted to being the owner, although he acknowledged that he did not possess any title or document that protected the legal origin of the anchors. As he did not notify the competent authorities of the discovery and tried to traffic with them, this person was reported for a serious infraction, with the anchors being seized," stated the note sent then by the Benemérita, which pointed out that this type of infraction can involve fines of between 3,001 and 150,000 euros according to the Historical Heritage Law.
After learning now of the lawyer's report and the decree signed then by San Ginés, La Voz has contacted the Civil Guard again, which has ratified the content of that statement and the fact that there was no cession but a seizure of assets with patrimonial value, as well as a complaint to the person who had them in his possession and who was trying to sell them when the agents intervened. In fact, it was the Heritage inspector who raised the alarm and contacted Deprona when he saw that those anchors were being offered for sale on the Internet.
From "temporary cession" to "permanent cession"
Despite San Ginés' decree, the record drawn up by the Heritage inspector when the Cabildo took charge of those anchors did indicate that they came from "a seizure" and that he received them "from the hands of the Seprona agents of the Civil Guard." "These are archaeological objects with patrimonial values, witnesses of the maritime history of Arrecife," he pointed out, noting that they were prior to the 19th century.
However, the report issued now by the lawyer denies that it was a seizure and refers to San Ginés' decree, insisting that it was a "temporary cession" for three months. In addition, she adds that later that cession "became permanent on June 9, 2017," although she does not explain whether this occurred based on a new decree or agreement with the alleged owner. "In any case, I will also report on this file," she concludes in her report, in which she also commits to reporting on the rest of the complaints not processed in recent years.
