The former president of Òmnium Cultural Jordi Cuixart has responded to the Supreme Court that the overview of his sentence for the reform of the Criminal Code that repeals sedition doesn’t “restore” what he considers to have been the violation of a sequence of elementary rights and insists on that it’ll proceed with its declare towards Spain earlier than the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
In a letter, to which Europa Press has had entry, the protection addresses the magistrates of the courtroom who judged the case of the ‘procés’ and who sentenced Cuixart to 9 years in jail for the crime of sedition. The Supreme Court had given the defenses and the accusations 8 days to rule on the impression of the penal reform on the sentences set in October 2019.
In 5 pages, Cuixart alleges that the repeal of the crime of sedition “doesn’t suggest in any approach an acknowledgment that the imprisonment and subsequent sentence” imposed on him by the Supreme Court “violated” his rights to a choose established by regulation, to a neutral and impartial courtroom, prison legality, freedom of meeting, not being topic to arbitrary detention and the misuse of energy.
Within the framework of the transient, the protection emphasizes that “regardless of the opening of this overview file” it considers that “the violation” of mentioned elementary rights continues to be unrecognized.
“It isn’t repaired and ensures of non-repetition should not established”, he stresses whereas making certain that “till this happens, the sentence of the Kingdom of Spain earlier than the Court of Strasbourg continues to be completely acceptable and obligatory”, in reference to the declare he filed earlier than the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Cuixart explains, on this regard, that the aforementioned lawsuit “is pending decision, to ensure that the violation of his elementary rights by the Kingdom of Spain to be declared and acknowledged, on the identical time that he’s assured the necessary reparation and assure of non-repetition”.
“From the outset, exactly the violations referring to the courtroom can hardly be acknowledged when it’s the identical courtroom that we reproached on the time for its lack of jurisdiction and impartiality, a particular composition of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, which is now going to resolve on the revision of the sentence, perpetuating the violations invoked”, denounces.
With regard to “substantive points, that’s, the prison nature of the details prosecuted”, Cuixart factors out that the mentions made within the legislative reform “to the shortage of respect for prison regulation and the liberty of meeting of earlier laws as a justification for the repeal of the prison offense of sedition are completely generic and contradictory”.
This state of affairs, he alleges, “makes it extraordinarily tough to revive the validity of the elemental rights which have been violated on this continuing and all this as a result of the current overview file isn’t aimed toward amending the arguments of this Second Chamber on the interpretation of those elementary rights “.
democratic want
“Thus, even when the sentence is reviewed, the conclusions of this Supreme Court on the contours of the precise of peaceable meeting will proceed to be thought of legally legitimate, for instance, when it dominated on the duty of Mr. Cuixart in these phrases,” affirms the written.
It stresses that the truth that “it’s declared that these details represent an train of a elementary proper, past the strict debate of penal legality, is a gift and future democratic necessity.”
“That is the authorized power that incorporates a declaration of violation of elementary rights that it appears that it’ll not happen within the current overview file, on the identical time that it supposes a primary reparation for the citizen who has suffered it,” provides his protection.
For Cuixart, with the reform of the Criminal Code, this reparation won’t happen both within the type of a declaration or within the type of restoration of the damages that he claims to have suffered for having been imprisoned for 3 years and eight months till a partial pardon was utilized to him.
Lastly, and with regard to the ensures of non-repetition, Cuixart maintains that he’s dealing with “an analogous state of affairs” whereas the legislative modification “doesn’t undertake any measure concerning the so reiterated and invoked misuse of energy perpetrated on this particular trigger”. “Therefore, it doesn’t set up any assure in order that it doesn’t happen once more sooner or later,” she provides.
The courtroom of the ‘procés’ should overview the sentences imposed in 2019 to use essentially the most favorable Penal Code to the convicted, as established by the norm itself in its article 2. Although the Supreme Court has summoned the events to rule, it will likely be the courtroom — presided over by Justice of the Peace Manuel Marchena — who lastly decides how the sentence stays.