Joan Ridao: “Multilingualism in Spain is more of a concession than a genuine conviction of the State.”

PalmJuan Ridao Martín (Rubí, Barcelona, ​​July 27, 1967) is a jurist and academic. He is currently an associate professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Barcelona and a legal advisor to the Parliament of Catalonia. Throughout his political and legal career, he has received several awards and recognitions. A member of the Republican Left of Catalonia (ERC), he has served as the party's general secretary (2008-2011), a member of the Spanish Congress of Deputies, and a member of the Parliament of Catalonia (1995-2008). Ridao will be in Palma this Thursday as part of the conference on linguistic rights organized by the University of the Balearic Islands (UIB) and the Balearic Cultural Association, which will take place at the Bar Association.

Her parents were born in Valladolid and Almería. What language was spoken at home? What do she remember about her first contact with Catalan?

— My parents' case is interesting because they quickly learned Catalan through work and integrated it as their own language. When they met, they were already speaking Catalan. So, I was born into a fully Catalan-speaking family. But, certainly, it's not the norm. Other relatives who also migrated learned Catalan, but they were bilingual and retained Spanish, especially within the family. My parents didn't.

What did your parents do for a living?

— My mother did housework in a home and my father was a business teacher.

So you were born Juan?

— Yes, I was always Juan at home, but because of the era in which I was born, they had to register me as Juan. It wasn't until the reform promoted by Suárez that I was able to change my name. When I was only 10 years old, I went with my father to the civil registry to change it.

When do you think you became politically aware?

— Generationally, I belong to the Spanish-speaking school. But my awakening in politics predates my activism; at 24, I was a councilor in my town's town hall.

How do you remember your defense of the language during your time in institutional politics, first as a member of the Parliament of Catalonia and later as spokesperson in the Congress of Deputies?

— I've always had a particular interest in both the political and legal fields. When I was in Congress (2008-2011), we always tried to use Catalan in our speeches to denounce the fact that it wasn't allowed at the time. In fact, there's a skit from Polonia that recalls the day José Bono made me switch to Spanish. I also remember Rubalcaba warning me about using an earpiece for simultaneous translation. "Joan, never the earpiece," he told me. Those were different times. We'll try to push for a reform of the regulations to allow the use of all the co-official languages ​​of the State, an objective that wasn't achieved until three years ago. The legal field has also always interested me, partly because of what I learned from my professors, Antoni Milian and Jaume Vernet, whom I consider myself, in part, a disciple of. I've been publishing articles on the subject for years, I'm invited to give lectures, and professionally I specialize in it.

Where would you say linguistic rights stand today within the Spanish constitutional order? Are there advances or stagnation?

— The linguistic model of the 1978 Constitution is based on a very clear asymmetry. As stated in Article 3 of the constitutional text, Castilian Spanish is official throughout the State and, moreover, there is a constitutional duty to know it. The other languages ​​are official only in their respective territories and do not have an equivalent duty. This places the principle of multilingualism in a weak position from its inception.

How do you assess the Constitutional Court's jurisprudence in this regard?

— There was an initial phase, particularly in the 1980s and 90s, with jurisprudence relatively favorable to the normalization of regional languages. However, following the 2010 ruling on the Statute of Catalonia, the dogma of...indispensable balance The gap between official languages ​​has limited the capacity to implement ambitious language policies. Therefore, there have been small sectoral advances—such as the use of languages ​​in Congress and some reforms in the judicial sphere—but the structural framework is still deficient. There is a process underway that could be described as a practical de-officialization or a reduction of the legal effects of one's own language.

What is the reason for this change?

— The shift from a more or less progressive majority to a clearly conservative one.

We often talk about co-official languages, but is there a real situation of equality with Castilian Spanish legally?

— No. Formal equality exists in the respective territories, but there is no structural equality. Castilian Spanish enjoys a reinforced position: it is an official language throughout the State, and knowledge of it is presumed. In contrast, knowledge of Catalan, Galician, and Basque is not generally required, not even for state employees stationed in territories with their own language, unless a law establishes it and passes constitutional review. This implies that the right to choose a language is primarily a right of the citizen, but it does not correspond to a symmetrical duty on the part of public authorities to guarantee the normal use of the native language.

How can we guarantee citizens' right to be served in their own language without violating labor rights?

— The key is understanding that knowledge of the local language in certain public sector jobs is not a privilege, but a functional requirement linked to citizens' rights. Other multilingual states establish clear language requirements for access to public service. If language profiles are well-defined and applied proportionally and gradually, there is no violation of labor rights, but rather a guarantee of the fundamental rights of others.

Why is the use of local languages ​​still minimal in the courts? It's the same in the Balearic Islands.

— This is largely due to the lack of a general requirement for judges, prosecutors, and court clerks to be proficient in the local language. The Constitutional Court has linked the right to be free from procedural unfairness to the duty to know Spanish, which is not the case with other languages. As a result, in practice, many proceedings are conducted in Spanish even when the language of the community is another.

What reforms would be necessary to guarantee that a citizen can litigate normally in Catalan, Galician, and Basque?

— The Organic Law of the Judiciary should be reformed to establish a requirement of sufficient knowledge of the official language of the territory for certain positions. The full validity of judicial documents without the need for translation should also be guaranteed within the territory where the language is official.

Does e-government fully guarantee linguistic rights?

— Not yet. Many government platforms do not allow procedures to be processed in all official languages. Reports from the Council of Europe on the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages ​​have emphasized this shortcoming. Digital administration should be an opportunity to normalize multilingualism, not to make it invisible.

In the Canary Islands, many instances of linguistic discrimination occur in the private sector. Could the government intervene?

— It's more complicated, because many factors are involved, but yes, above all, through consumer legislation, public procurement, and customer service. State initiatives already exist that require large companies to guarantee service in the official language of the territory. The government can develop sector-specific regulations, as well as incorporate language clauses into contracts, strengthen inspections, and raise awareness.

Are we witnessing a regression in linguistic rights?

— In some areas, yes. Following Constitutional Court ruling 31/2010, there have been regressive reforms and judicial decisions, especially in education and the civil service, in certain autonomous communities. Despite some signs of progress, such as the use of all official languages ​​in the Congress of Deputies and certain recent sectoral reforms, the State has not yet fully embraced the active defense of linguistic diversity.

What impact would full official status for Catalan have in the European Union?

— It would have significant symbolic and practical value: it would allow the fully valid use of Catalan in European institutions and strengthen its international prestige. It would also reinforce the idea that linguistic diversity is a European value, not just an internal matter.

Are there comparable models in Europe that can serve as a reference?

— Yes, countries like Belgium and Switzerland have developed systems in which official languages ​​have effective recognition at the state level. They are different realities, but they show that it is possible to establish robust multilingualism if there is political will.

What would you recommend to the public authorities of the Balearic Islands to strengthen linguistic rights?

— The language requirement for public sector jobs should be strengthened, and at the very least, language training should be reinstated in the healthcare sector, as this is an area particularly affected by the linguistic rights of Catalan speakers in such a sensitive matter as healthcare. Regarding consumer rights, the development of sector-specific regulations to guarantee this right in the private sphere could also be explored.