Sijena: The MNAC is not giving up and will submit a written opposition with new technical reports.

The MNAC has one last hope: that the dispute over the Sijena murals will finally find a technical opinion. Pepe Serra, the museum's general director, stated yesterday that when they receive the order for the enforced execution of the ruling, which requires them to hand over the murals, they will submit a written opposition with the technical reports issued by the commission created by the board of trustees, which included specialists selected by the Ministry of Culture, the Generalitat (Catalan Government), and the City Council. Aragón also served on this commission, but they left after the second day. "It's not worth saying on TV that it can be done; the important thing is to have the reports, sign them, and accept responsibility," asserted Pepe Serra.

The museum director stated that they do not oppose the ruling, but that they are unable to carry it out without damaging the paintings. "We're not talking about whether it's possible or not; that's frivolous. We're talking about forecasting probabilities , and the likelihood of damage from any transfer is too great, especially since it's an asset that can't be repaired," Serra clarified.

In any case, the director of the MNAC assures that no one from Aragon has provided them with the condition of the Chapter House where the ruling states the murals are to be placed. "And we need this information to carry out the dismantling. I'm not saying it's in poor condition; I'm just saying that they haven't presented us with any report detailing the technical specifications of the space in a place where temperatures are 37 degrees Celsius in the summer and 0 degrees Celsius in the winter ."

Now everything comes down to the technical aspect. It's 132 meters of a work whose largest piece is no more than a millimeter thick . And 35 percent of it is made up of integrated paintings by the Gugol brothers, which are in even worse condition. "The story that it was a plunder is false. The reality is that it was a miraculous rescue, an international example of good practice. We don't have the mural paintings; they were lost in the fire. What remains is a model artifact in preventive conservation."

The truth is that the Sijena case still seems like it's a long one. Among the dangers Serra pointed out is the formation of salts in the fabrics, which would open holes in the paint and literally eat it away if moved to an uncontrolled environment. "Paints have an enormous potential to be chemically reactive. A change in temperature or relative humidity generates chemical reactions. The formation of salts causes crystals to appear that remove the paint. Four years ago, we removed a micro sample. In the office, it was filled with glass that destroyed the paint . It's an invisible risk, but one that is technically proven," he concluded.

The entrenched problem of the Sijena murals has finally become a moral issue. There is a triad of problems that conflict with the commitment to respect the ruling. First, the commitment to protect the cultural asset from any damage. Second, to legally protect the teams that would be forced to dismantle and move the pieces from any claim. And third, to defend themselves against erroneous accounts. According to the final ruling, the MNAC is obligated to take charge of the dismantling, packaging, and moving of pieces that it knows will be damaged if it complies with the Supreme Court's ruling. All the technical reports support this, even those held by Aragón. What should be done?

Meanwhile, the Aragon government 's threat remains firm: either they send them now, whether they're ready or not, or they pay €5,000 a day and the galleries close, as they demanded in court last Friday. "We also have to protect our staff and ensure they are exonerated from any damage that may occur to the works. It can't be that a judge forces us to move the paintings and then our team has legal liabilities," Serra said.

The MNAC continues to prioritize the protection of its heritage. It knows it has the backing of the international community and museums around the world. Their only concern is ensuring that pieces of such heritage value are not damaged. "We are not engaging in delaying tactics. We never said the works were ours; they are in storage, and we know it. The problem is another: the technical inability to move them without damaging them," Serrá asserted.

For the director of the MNAC, the comparison with the Lady of Elche and Guernica is obvious. "The risk assessment has prevailed in both cases, and I agree. The heritage law specifies that pieces must be protected as a legacy for future generations, and this is an obvious case," he asserted. "The Ministry of Culture should be asked why it hasn't submitted a risk assessment for Sijena," Serra stated.

Regarding whether or not they submitted technical reports to the Supreme Court, Serra's response was forceful. From the outset, the judge had access to all the reports advising against the transfer , and the Supreme Court only filed an appeal because it was the legally appropriate course of action. The technical issue is the key to the case. The MNAC insists on putting it front and center, knowing that there is no technician in the world capable of signing off on the risk of deterioration if the property is transferred. Those in Aragon want to refer to the ruling and avoid the issue, since they know they have no firm arguments.

Now we just have to wait for the ruling on the enforcement of the judgment. Then they will file their opposition brief. The technical reports will arrive, and the judge will have to decide whether to reject them or not . If the judge rejects them and damages are caused, could liability be held? Who? In Sagunto, construction work on the Roman Theater was halted due to technical incompetence. Will the same happen in Sijena, or will we see the spectacle of the caravan of murals by truck to Los Monegros?