After an accident, opposition parties demand explanations and political responsibility, while government officials call for caution and accuse their rivals of exploiting grief. The specific names, place and date may change, but the pattern remains familiar.
The article argues that parties should maintain the same standards when their position changes. In opposition, responsibility is often traced directly to the president. In government, that chain is more likely to stop at a technical official or an intermediate level.
Demanding explanations is part of democratic accountability, and calls for resignations do not necessarily have to wait for a judicial ruling. The difficulty, however, lies in applying that principle consistently, regardless of which party is responsible.
The text cites several Spanish cases. The PSOE called for the resignation of Valencian president Carlos Mazón over the management of the dana, a demand the article considers legitimate. In the Angrois railway disaster, the PP and PSOE blocked a commission of inquiry in the Galician Parliament for years, despite potential responsibilities involving former Popular Party minister Ana Pastor and her Socialist predecessor, José Blanco.
The circumstances and responsibilities differed in each case, but the author sees a recurring tendency to describe resignation demands as essential or unacceptable depending on whom they target. Following the railway tragedy in Urda, Alberto Núñez Feijóo is calling for the departure of Pedro Sánchez and Óscar Puente, while the Government is defending those officeholders.
The names may change again in the future, as will the political arguments. The families affected by these tragedies, however, cannot recover the lives they had before.
Sources: La Vanguardia.