How curious patriotism is when it goes through a courthouse. Until the day before, everything was "respect for Justice," "he who does it, pays for it," and "Spain is a state of law." As soon as the summoned person is one of theirs, suddenly, dictatorship, political persecution, and judges at the service of the Government appear. What speed in changing principles.
These days, Vito Zoppellari Quiles, better known as Vito Quiles, has once again made headlines. Not for uncovering a major corruption scheme, nor for a journalistic investigation that has shaken the foundations of power. The reason has been much more prosaic: a judicial order issued after failing to appear for two summonses in a case for an alleged offense against honor, related to the dissemination of an alleged hoax about a public employee.
Vito Quiles has spent years presenting himself as the scourge of power. Although, to be honest, his greatest talent does not seem to be in uncovering major journalistic scandals, but in turning every controversy into viral content. Some journalists spend months cross-referencing documents. Others seem more concerned with locating the best camera angle before starting to record.
And, as expected, the performance began.
Messages on social media proclaiming that he was not going to "surrender to Sánchez." Speeches about political persecution. The victimhood machine working at full capacity. For a few hours, it gave the impression that some intended to convince us that Spain had ceased to be a state of law to become a banana republic. All because of a judicial order issued after two non-appearances.
He then appeared before the court. And exactly what any jurist knew would happen, happened. The judge annulled the arrest warrant because its purpose had already been fulfilled: to bring the investigated person before the court.
But what is truly interesting about this story is not in the courthouse, but in the reactions. What would have happened if a left-wing activist had failed to appear for two judicial summonses? Would we also hear talk of political persecution, or would the old "he who does it, pays for it" return?
The archives have a good memory. When Valtònyc left Spain or Pablo Hasél entered prison, many of those who today discover freedom of expression enthusiastically defended the strict compliance with judicial resolutions.
The reason for which he was summoned is not the only one that affects him. According to the published information, he maintains other open investigations for alleged crimes of fraud, hate speech, disclosure of secrets, harassment, and defamation. Investigating does not mean condemning. Just as proclaiming oneself persecuted does not automatically make anyone a political prisoner.
Perhaps the real problem is not Vito Quiles. Agitators have always existed. What is worrying is the ease with which a part of the political and media ecosystem turns any ordinary judicial action into an epic of democratic resistance when the protagonist is one of their own.
Democracy consists of accepting that the same rules must apply to everyone. Because Justice does not change depending on who crosses the courthouse door. What changes, too often, is the ability of some to disguise as persecution what is nothing more than a judicial procedure. And that, more than journalism, looks too much like a political marketing strategy.