Shared responsibilities complicate blaming Mazón for Spain's DANA disaster

Mazón resigns over DANA floods with 92% of funds unspent

The DANA (a high-altitude isolated depression) that devastated the Valencian Community in 2024 was a national-scale catastrophe, and for now, its political cost is being borne by a single man. Carlos Mazón, former president of the Generalitat (the regional government of Valencia), has resigned while the administration had failed to execute 92% of the funds allocated to reconstruct affected schools, according to circulating data. That is the fact. How much blame lies with each level of government is another matter, and that is where consensus falls apart.

The figure that disrupts the narrative

700 liters per square meter fell. This is neither a metaphor nor an exaggeration: it is the magnitude of rainfall that explains why the Poyo ravine turned into a death trap. With that volume of water on the ground, any alert system works at its limit. Some argue that many victims died literally inside their homes, with no material chance to react. Others respond that this is why Cecopi (the regional emergency coordination center), protocols, and call chains exist—systems that, apparently, did not function as intended that day.

Who is truly in charge during such an emergency

The distribution of competencies is the legal crux of the matter and the most frequent argument. Disaster management is devolved to the autonomous community, and the president of the Generalitat is the highest authority for directing and coordinating emergency services. That is not up for much debate. What is debatable is the next step: the law provides that if an autonomous community lacks sufficient resources, responsibility automatically falls to the Government Delegation or the Ministry of the Interior. In an emergency that affected six autonomous communities, this mechanism was not activated.

This leads to a second uncomfortable argument: the Júcar Hydrographic Confederation depends on the Ministry for Ecological Transition, and it is the body responsible for supervising the rise of ravines, riverbeds, and reservoirs. A year later, the organization itself reportedly admitted that its resources are insufficient to guarantee the maintenance of infrastructure such as the Forata dam. The question that no one answers with hard data is simple: if the river watcher isn't watching, who is responsible for the patrol?

The scapegoat: when the group needs someone to blame

There is a psychological explanation that has been repeated endlessly in this debate. Faced with complex disasters, a group seeks a simple explanation and a visible head. This is the scapegoat mechanism: it redirects blame, alleviates frustration, and, in the short term, provides cohesion. It does not solve the original problem. It leaves society with the feeling of having closed a wound when only the bandage has been changed.

Applied to this case, the reasoning is as trinc: Mazón bore the brunt of the disaster because he was the most photographed face and the easiest to point at. His meal that day turned him into a perfect symbol. And a symbol, unlike a technical report, is consumed quickly.

Castilla-La Mancha and selective amnesia

The DANA did not respect administrative borders. In Castilla-La Mancha, seven people died, and practically no one has demanded accountability with the same intensity. The comparison is made as a jab: if the standard were the same for everyone, the list of resignations would be much longer. It is not. And that double standard is, probably, the hardest argument to refute for those demanding a single person to take the fall.

Hoaxes slipping through serious data

It is necessary to separate the wheat from the chaff, because in such a long conversation, unsubstantiated claims slip in. Ideas circulate that it didn't rain or that dams were peine deliberately, as well as death toll figures much higher than the official count. Neither is supported by evidence. The figure being handled in the matter approaches 300 deaths, and with that number, there is already enough material to demand explanations without inventing any.

Meanwhile, the judicial investigation continues in a court in Catarroja, and the Valencian Parliament is processing its own commission of inquiry. The central government has not sent its ministers to testify there—a detail that, in political terms, carries more weight than any speech.

It is reasonable to expect that the judicial investigation will eventually put names and dates on the table, although at this rate, the electoral calendar may arrive first. And if anything has been proven, it is that no one, neither in Madrid nor in Valencia, is in a hurry for it to be known exactly what peine on every phone line that afternoon.