ACCYDED - Citizens Association Against Corruption and for the Defense of the Rule of Law

Trilerism

Trilerism

The shell-game hustler does not win through quick hands, but because he never plays alone: accomplices cheer, place fake bets and shout down the victim the moment doubts arise. That old street scam has become a method of governance, played today in meetings, official offices and courtrooms, with stamped papers instead of peas. The citizen always loses.

Anatomy of an organised deception

The shell game is a con played in full view. Its success depends not on the dexterity of the hands moving the cups, but on the human scenery around them: a handful of allies who agree at just the right moment, who raise their voices whenever the protester must be silenced, and who manufacture the appearance that everything is perfectly normal. The victim does not lose through inattention; he loses because the game is rigged from the start.

Attend any meeting where other people's money is being decided and the scene is instantly recognisable: a majority lined up in advance, votes taken by acclamation and a minority denied the floor. What on the street would be fraud is, within institutions, dressed up in minutes, reports and rulings. That veneer of legality is precisely what makes it so dangerous.

The three cups of power

Corruption is not the preserve of a single branch of the State. The shell game appears, in different guises, in all three:

  • In the legislature, when transparency laws are passed with so many exceptions that the general principle is reduced to a mere statement of intent.
  • In the executive, when public authorities turn silence, delay and the vague invocation of legal limits into an everyday way of avoiding accountability.
  • In the judiciary, when the gears of the process are aligned so that the outcome is settled before the citizen has a chance to defend himself.

In the courts: the report nobody signs

One of the most troubling examples occurs in the courts. A judge asks the Public Prosecutor's Office for its opinion, and the report that comes back leans, with barely any reasoning, towards the outcome the court seemed to want, such as closing the case or dismissing the claim. The cup moves and the pea vanishes.

We have also frequently observed another striking practice: documents signed only with a title, "Deputy Chief Prosecutor" (Teniente Fiscal), with no name identifying the author. The Organic Statute of the Public Prosecutor's Office rests on the principles of unity of action and hierarchical dependence, always subject to legality and impartiality. But hierarchy cannot be used as a shield: whoever signs an opinion that may decide the fate of a case must be identifiable and answerable for what they write. Functional anonymity dilutes responsibility and leaves the citizen facing a faceless institution.

In public bodies: confidentiality on demand

Spain's Law 19/2013 on transparency, access to public information and good governance recognises everyone's right of access to public information. Its limits, set out in Article 14, must be applied in a justified and proportionate manner, taking into account the circumstances of each case and any overriding public interest in disclosure. In practice, however, "confidentiality" is played like a wild card: wanting to hide something is enough to declare it restricted. Who can challenge what nobody is allowed to see?

The same trick is repeated with data protection rules. Organic Law 3/2018 protects people against the misuse of their information, not managers against scrutiny by those who pay them. Yet it is used as an excuse to deny a co-owner, a member or a neighbour access to the very invoices they are required to pay. You pay, but you may not ask.

When the law is used to hide rather than to protect, it is no longer a right but a hustler's cup, whether held by a robed hand or an official one.

How to break up the game

The hustler only thrives while nobody looks closely at his hands. The answer, therefore, is light and persistence:

  1. Demand in writing the identity of whoever signs any report or decision that affects you.
  2. Exercise your right of access to public information and, if refused, appeal to the Transparency and Good Governance Council or the equivalent regional body.
  3. Do not accept data protection as a pretext for withholding information about expenses you are paying for.
  4. Document every irregularity and share it with associations and media outlets that can give it visibility.

We will keep exposing examples of institutional shell games in this space. Every case brought to light is a game the hustler can no longer win in silence. If you have fallen victim to one of these tricks, do not give up: transparency is not something to beg for; it is something to demand.

Further reading