Escaldes Comú defends altering commissioned public artwork, saying 'we paid him'

We suspected the Escaldes Comú's final argument in the controversial Caldes case would be that whoever pays has the say, and the Comú's minor consul, Quim Dolsa, has confirmed that bluntly. “This gentleman did the work he had to do and for us it is finished. We paid him, and we paid him very well. We gave him an opportunity that cost all of us a lot of money,” Dolsa said, adding that the project’s overrun was significant.

The project began in November 2022 with an official budget of €4.5 million, concluded two years later, and—according to the Comú—ended with a final cost exceeding €5 million, so the reported overrun is about €500,000, roughly 10%. By way of comparison, the Espai Columba was initially estimated at €300,000 and ultimately cost €670,000.

The dispute is not only about cost but about whether the Comú has the right to alter unilaterally an artwork it commissioned through a public competition. The intervention, titled L'aigua i la forma, includes public washbasins, a fountain, pipes, taps and pavement. Fifteen days earlier, artist Sam Bosque painted on one of the washbasins a reproduction of a photograph by Deverell from 1873, prompting the current row.

Dolsa insists that Balmaseda, the commissioned artist, does not need to give permission for such changes. “Balmaseda does not have to give permission for anything. And if he deems it appropriate, let him sue,” Dolsa said. He downplayed the alteration’s impact, asking rhetorically whether painting a mural on a concrete wall facing the road constitutes damaging the work and arguing it could be removed with a pressure washer.

By contrast, art historian Josep Maria Ubach, who has catalogued the public sculpture in a forthcoming volume, argues the washbasin is an integral part of L'aigua i la forma. He says Balmaseda is protected by the moral right to integrity enshrined in Article 6.1.b of the current Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law, which allows an author to oppose any distortion, mutilation, modification or other action that would be detrimental to their honor or reputation.

Balmaseda himself has resisted public comment beyond insisting that he expressly forbade the mural. Ubach stresses that intervening on the washbasin wall is equivalent to repainting other elements of the project—such as the fountain or the pipes—and therefore affects the integrity of the work as conceived by the artist.

Dolsa countered that the Comú’s action did not amount to breaking the work and that he refused to attribute greater importance to the alteration. Supporters of Balmaseda’s position see the intervention as a direct modification of an artwork delivered under contract, while the Comú frames it as use and maintenance of public space after payment for the commissioned work.

The conflict highlights tensions between municipal authority over public spaces, contractual outcomes of commissioned public art, and the moral rights of artists regarding the modification of their works.