The presence of the King Emeritus at the funeral of Elizabeth II, uncomfortably close to the King and Queen by design of British protocol, has once again revealed, as happened in a less solemn context with his participation in the Sanxenxo regattas, to what extent Juan Carlos I constitutes a disorder for the image of the Spanish monarchy and for institutional normality of the country. As much as he sat next to the Kings as a result of a decision outside the Spanish Royal House, the fact that it was the first time that he coincided with his son in an official act, since the funeral for the infanta Doña Pilar in 2020 , has overshadowed the participation of Felipe VI and Queen Letizia in the Westminster ceremony. And it has led to interpretations about every gesture and look of the four involved in the tense scene. Since he left for Abu Dhabi, after meeting the irregularities he had committed in various areas of his public and private life, Juan Carlos constitutes a permanent source of disturbance. And as long as he continues in the legal and institutional limbo in which he finds himself, everything he does, and even what he does not do, will continue to affect Spain’s image and credibility in the world.
The ambiguity of his institutional and legal position – he is pending a lawsuit for harassment in the United Kingdom filed by Corinna Larsen that added morbidity to his trip – constitutes a headache for the monarchy. That’s how it was when he pretended to return, and even reside, in La Zarzuela, when some of the causes that were imputed to him for having prescribed or having happened during periods in which he was protected by his inviolability were archived. When his son King Felipe VI made it clear to him that the normalization of his figure would have caused irreparable damage to the institution, he agreed to continue in Abu Dhabi, but then went to Galicia to take a mass bath prepared by old friends. After the private interview he had with his son at the Zarzuela, at the end of the Sanxenxo regattas, he seemed to have understood the message: his free action is one of the main obstacles that the Spanish monarchy has for its consolidation. It is true that his presence in London must be framed within the family relations that exist between the Bourbons and the House of Windsor, but he could have declined the invitation, or have suggested a different location within the cathedral. It was more difficult for King Felipe, that must attend to the sensitivity of a part of Spanish society and the attempt of the political right to claim the return of the emeritus trying to equate the fact that his actions have not been judged with the fact that the monarch has been cleared of all guilt. A misunderstanding that would have been avoided if Juan Carlos had been accountable to justice, or at least of the Crown having issued a much more unequivocal assessment of the past and present performance of the former head of state.
This situation is unsustainable. In the hectic times we live in, Felipe VI needs a calm that does not allow him the uncontrollable actions of his father. Juan Carlos, who played an overall positive role in the Spanish transition, spoiled much of his credit during the last years of his mandate. What he did will form part of his biography, but he does want to do one last service to the monarchy and the country, adopt a discreet profile, away from any institutional activity in which his son, the King, is involved and that can be considered, in the absence of the assumption of criminal responsibilities, at least as a minimum act of contrition.