promoting peaceful coexistence had originally drafted a longer name: municipal ordinance to promote peaceful coexistence of social behavior and the protection of public spaces . It's funny, but have left all that does not respond to its content. Thus the first block adjectives that qualify are the following:
Liar, hypocritical and false.When you see before you an ordinance entitled and think will delve into that concept as noble and republican citizenship
, training and consolidation of the same, the mechanisms for citizen participation and involvement in public affairs, and co-responsibility for services, promotion of associations ... you think you'll find a positive and exciting standard. But spend the first page and disappointments you fast, since the preamble will make clear that: "The purpose of this ordinance is to preserve the public space as a place of coexistence and citizenship [...] is the decision of the City minor and delete antisocial acts of our city and to this end is a need for a legislative text. " Who should bother looking and, if necessary, sanction him. Few would dispute (more on that later), but the fact is that this is not what the title says it is this ordinance. Reduce the life of society to a comprehensive catalog and detailed performance is prohibited too express disdain the very concept of coexistence.
Franco, paternalistic and boorish.
If giving any hint as to measure "development", we know that you have to do is do things forbidden and what is the amount of the fine that we make to "preserve public space", then regulate those activities that most field erode the status of living we want to give the public space. And there is little doubt. Two phenomena are more aggressive in this regard: commercial advertising and traffic.
bus shelters, buses themselves, newsstands, telephone booths, commercial billboards, the staves of time and temperature, the staffs of batteries and new staffs that yes, big and ugly as they alone. The agora, the forum, the area of \u200b\u200bthe city where the private leaves room for the public, lies the soul of the city itself, we have moved directly to the supermarket, and we brought it to the hall of our own portal. The street no longer seems to be a space to promote coexistence, but to promote consumerism, is like a magazine of the Media Mark, but big.
And what about the traffic. Noise, danger, smoke, stress ... The only reference to it that makes the ordinance is art.13.5: "Cyclists should take a civics as it flows through the town ..." It is recochineo!, As if the bikes were More vehicles disturb the living, as if cyclists were the only ones who must assume incivility.
The truth is that the ordinance has some real gems too numerous to detail. I would only have, 50's repertoire: Article 6c) "A person shall not perform particularly abusive, arbitrary or discriminatory or involving physical or moral coercion, psychological or otherwise" (sic). Article 6.d) "is a basic duty of peaceful coexistence treated with respect, care and special consideration to those who, by their personal, social or otherwise, have the greatest need" (Sic). You really need to tell us from a city ordinance should not be hitting people on the street and to be treated with consideration for the elderly? Because if we are, we are. And then you have to specify also from the ordinance which is the due consideration and under what circumstances, otherwise open a world of arbitrariness in the conduct of law enforcement officers.
Not to mention the requirement of express authorization for any association put an information table on the street, that smacks too much of the censorship expressly prohibited under Article 20 of our Constitution.
Although I like most is this: Section 13.2: "It shall be prohibited in public [...] of activities (that) threatens the safety of people [...]. This prohibition shall not apply in cases where permission has been obtained. " (I swear, I read it).
unnecessary, stupid and tortuous.
yes we said before, we must avoid that annoying and disturbing, if necessary, punish. Of course. Approval in plenary Councillor stressed that, in so far this year, both environmental and educators local police had opened 583 files for improper conduct of citizens. I think it's important that we stay with this data. Obviously explain that in a state of law can not punish anything that is not established. That is, if you have opened these files is, precisely and inexorably, that the legislation which allows them to be opened already exists. There
have ordinances Cleaning (2001: 107 articles), Animals (2002: 25 articles and 3 provisions), Green Spaces (2003: 13 articles, 1 and 3 annexes available), Advertising (2006: 23 items and 5 rules), Noise (2009: 52 articles 8 provisions and 2 annexes) or by the General Plan, under review. No citizen behavior seems to be lacking in regulation, anyone could think that peeing in the street, broken streetlights or annoy you with noise was not already banned? The new ordinance is in conflict with all previous absolutely, very different forms typifying the conduct and fined widely.
Fortunately, the Popular Party has noticed and made some sense in all this by adding a transitional provision which states: "shall be deemed repealed few determinations were established in other municipal ordinances that are dissatisfied with this Ordinance. In what is not contradictory, other municipal ordinances apply in a supplementary. " Okay, perfect, would have all the sense if it were not in the same text, two lines before the additional provision reads: "This Ordinance shall supplementary nature of such other municipal ordinances regulating the matter more specific. So the Ordinance says they are an extra from the others and that others are also hers. The "suppletory" from "supletorizado" is something that not even Groucho had repaired. For although the ordinance does not read the PP has bundled brown.
Ending already, we can not say that this text with claims of "civic ordinance" is not even one of those nineteenth-century ordinances "police and good government." Its etymology is the same: the civitas, city, citizenship, civilization ... of the Romans, or the polis, politics, the Greek Police (police understood the term in its most amiable of being in state police, magazine , tidy, presentable ...). Those of Logroño in 1876 and 1900 are two texts of tremendous value to dive in the history of this city and the lifestyle of its inhabitants. Adjusted from the hours of men and women bathing in the Ebro to the prohibition against law enforcement officers removed the mask to a person during Carnival.
said, I repeat, in plenary council, which had opened 583 files for uncivil behavior. Given the enormous diversity of punishable actions: starting a flower, not picking up the dog poop, to high volume of radio, throwing papers ... actually 583 cases opened this year in a city of 153,000 inhabitants is a real trifle, a trifle, something that speaks much good sense and citizens in general, and, above all, unnecessary what is this new ordinance (compare, for example, with tens of thousands of traffic fines and more than two thousand accidents).
These days we have witnessed the interesting talks on the Inquisition and the witch trial held in Logroño Zugarramurdi four hundred years ago. The members of that tribunal would be delighted to see that the inquisitorial spirit is still alive on this earth and that is not only to Vara de Rey, 3. The speakers at this conference have emphasized the moral obligation to investigate those events and have placed particular emphasis on the overwhelming conclusion, demolishing, timeless reached by Alonso de Salazar (the "lawyer of the Witches") after, the process is complete, two thousand interviews in the north of Navarre: "no witches nor bewitched until they started talking about them."
Carlos Álvarez González
0 comments:
Post a Comment