The Francisco Franco National Foundation already sees its end. The Government has taken another step in the process of extinguishing the organization by signing the agreement to initiate the procedure and officially notifying the foundation, which has a first phase of ten business days starting this Friday to make allegations. The resolution, signed by the Minister of Culture, Ernest Urtasun, considers it proven that the foundation does not pursue general interest purposes, makes an “apology for the dictatorship” and “humiliates” its victims, which are the requirements required by law to urge its closure.
The process began in June of last year, with the opening of previous actions aimed at gathering information from Culture, on which the Protectorate of Foundations depends. Since then, it has received reports from the State Attorney's Office and the State Secretariat for Democratic Memory, which has analyzed more than 5,000 publications on the foundation's website and social networks as well as its appearances in the press from 2018 to March 2025 to conclude that it complies with the causes of extinction introduced by the Democratic Memory Law.
The procedures that are starting now contemplate several steps until the formal presentation of the extinction request before the Justice, a moment in which, according to Government sources, precautionary measures will be requested to limit the activity of the foundation. The maximum period for this to happen is nine months, although everything will depend on the allegations presented by the foundation chaired by former general Juan Chicharro. After the request for closure by the Protectorate, the judge's turn will begin, in charge of making the final decision.
The steps taken by Culture against the fascist entity are not limited to proposing its closure, but go further: sources from the Ministry point out that the content of the extensive archive held by the foundation is currently “being analyzed” to determine “if there are documents of a public nature” and in that case “try to recover them.” The process that the Government plans to initiate is similar to that undertaken against the Franco family for the assets stored in the Pazo de Meirás and that Justice has ended up returning to the public treasury.
A “main” purpose and other instrumental ones
The reports that have analyzed the foundation's activity include a study by Professor of Constitutional Law at the Complutense University of Madrid Javier García Fernández and interviews with several victims of the dictatorship, as well as an examination of its career in the media. Based on them, the agreement concludes that the organization has “one main activity” among all those included in its statutes, which is to “disseminate and promote the study and knowledge of the legacy and achievements” of Franco and his regime “between 1936 and 1977.” A purpose that “aims to provide an unequivocally positive vision of Francoism,” the text points out.
This is despite the fact that the statutes also include the promotion “of education, scientific and technical research and other cultural activities”, objectives that, although they may lead one to think that the organization pursues general interest purposes, “are actually instrumental to the main purpose,” the agreement highlights. And also “they are almost non-existent,” he adds.
In this sense, the Foundations Law lists some purposes to consider that they comply with the general interest – one of its requirements –, among them the “promotion of constitutional values” or the “defense” of democratic principles. The report of the Secretary of State for Democratic Memory emphasizes that the activity of the organization founded in 1976, shortly after the death of the dictator, “is irreconcilable” with these purposes, as well as with those that “inspire” the Law of Democratic Memory, which “repudiates and condemns” the coup d'état of 1936 and the dictatorship.
One of the anomalies is, in fact, that foundations are required to pursue the general interest because they enjoy a special tax regime and their affiliates enjoy deductions. In addition, they can count on free legal assistance if they prove insufficient resources, something that also applies to the Francisco Franco foundation despite praising the dictator.
The “humiliation” of the victims
The agreement concludes that the foundation is advocating for Franco's regime and that it “belittles and humiliates the dignity” of the victims, which are the two conditions imposed by the law. To reach this conclusion, the reports highlight that “the entire content of the website” is dedicated “to the exaltation of the dictator and the dictatorship” with components of “glorification.” Thus, published headlines stand out that speak of the “liberation” of cities that were occupied by the rebels after the coup d'état or texts that call the Civil War “Crusade”, in the purest Franco style.
In some of the articles, the foundation describes October 1, the day Franco was named Generalissimo, as “a decisive step for victory in the Civil War” and the creation “of a new regime that marked the upward course of Spain.” The report by Professor García Fernández states that “the glorification activity is mainly articulated” through communications that “in a high percentage” pay homage to Franco and the symbols of the regime. In addition, its contents advertise events, anniversaries and masses – for example, 20N – to “reinforce the heroic story of Francoism.”
Although the study recognizes that there are fewer publications dedicated to the victims of the dictatorship, it does confirm that in them “treatment with contempt and humiliation of their dignity emerges.” This is a requirement that the Democratic Memory Law included during its processing at the proposal of the General Council of the Judiciary as part of the apology for Francoism. A contempt that, in the opinion of the report, appears “under the denialist prism, that is, the denial of repression or the reduction of its scope.”
Among other examples, he cites some texts in which the bombing of Gernika in 1937 by fascist aviation is described as a “tragedy, lie and farce.” There is also content that declares that “Francoism did not commit a genocide, the Second Republic did”, that deny that the Cuelgamuros Valley was built based on forced labor or that minimize the bloody massacre in Badajoz in 1936 under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Yagüe.
The agreement signed by Urtasun highlights “three patterns” of “humiliation” of those who were victims of Franco's regime or their relatives: their “disqualification”, the denial of damages, calling tragic episodes a “lie” or “farce”, and the “biased appropriation and re-reading” of the past. All of this points to a “deliberate strategy” by the foundation to “ridicule and delegitimize” the victims of Franco's repression, whom the Secretary of State for Democratic Memory has interviewed.
The testimonies collected “show” how the organization's activities “reignite suffering and painfully open their wounds.” For example, when those who are looking for their relatives buried by Franco in Cuelgamuros see how the foundation tries to paralyze the exhumation work in court – finally authorized by Justice last March – or when those who still have loved ones in the Víznar ravine (Granada) observe the entity “promote” each anniversary of Franco's death “celebrations and ceremonies.”