The National Museum of Art of Catalonia (MNAC) has formally requested a rectification from the judge in the Sijena case. In a written statement, the museum's lawyers warn that the refusal to admit a report from the Institute of Cultural Heritage violates their right to defense and due process, creating a constitutionally unacceptable situation.
Expert evidence as a pillar of the judicial process ⚖️
The report requested from the Institute of Cultural Heritage is key to determining the ownership of the disputed works. By denying its admission, the court prevents the MNAC from presenting technical evidence on the conservation and provenance of the pieces. This omission limits the defense's ability to counter the arguments of the opposing party, creating a procedural imbalance that the lawyers consider a violation of Article 24 of the Constitution.
The judge and her particular concept of justice 🏛️
The judge seems to apply a selective criterion: she admits evidence she likes and rejects what she doesn't. If this were a menu, the MNAC would ask to change restaurants. At this rate, they will soon require reports to be presented on papyrus so the judge considers them ancient and authentic. The museum's defense is already thinking about appealing, but they might need a GPS to navigate this judicial labyrinth.