Judge Llarena, the Prosecutor’s Office, the State Attorney’s Office and jurists of all sensitivities consider that aggravated embezzlement must be utilized to them. The pronouncement of the courtroom that sentenced Junqueras is lacking, from the identical Supreme Court as Pablo Llarena The Government maintains that the reform doesn’t He goes to depart the crimes of the procés unpunished, in opposition to the PP that accuses him of decriminalizing them
Over and over once more the Government has repeated that, regardless of the repeal of sedition and the discount for some kinds of embezzlement, the crimes of the procés weren’t going to go unpunished. Also advert nauseam, the PP has mentioned the alternative, and has accused the Executive of decriminalizing the crime in circumstances during which it impacts the independence motion. But if we keep on with public statements, it was Gabriel Rufián, ERC spokesman, one of many first to say that this reform was not designed for 1-O, however for “future occasions”.
That within the political sphere. But the reality is that within the authorized discipline, till now, the authorized positions -and opinions- agree with the Sánchez Executive. More and extra individuals consider that Oriol Junqueras will proceed to be disqualified and that Puigdemont could be tried and sentenced to excessive sentences for the crime of embezzlement. At the second, Judge Llarena, the Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office have achieved so; and it’s maintained by quite a few jurists who’re given a voice as of late and who consider that within the case of the method, the embezzlement is critical and doesn’t match with the brand new minor kind.
The first choice on this sense was made by Pablo Llarena, the Supreme Court Justice of the Peace who’s instructing what stays of the method and who has Carles Puigdemont and the remainder of the escaped 1-O leaders on trial. The identical day the reform got here into drive, he deactivated the give up orders for sedition and left them in disobedience. But as for the opposite crime charged, embezzlement, he maintained the accusation in its most critical part.
the revenue motive
The secret is in revenue. The authorities reform meant that when the embezzlement was non-profit, the utmost jail sentence could be 4 years, in comparison with twelve for these which might be for-profit. As for the disqualification, in these circumstances it might stay for a most of six years, in comparison with the utmost of 20 with which it was punishable earlier than the reform. But Llarena defined that revenue didn’t need to be placing cash in his pocket and determined to cost Puigdemont and the remainder of the defendants with the accusation of aggravated embezzlement, which entails penalties of as much as 12 years in jail and 20 years of disqualification.
According to the RAE, revenue is the “acquire or profit obtained from one thing”, and in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court itself, this profit doesn’t need to be monetary.
This is how the Justice of the Peace defined it in his automotive, the place he identified that the cash from 1-O was used for a objective, not solely completely different from what was deliberate, but additionally illegitimate and that this remaining vacation spot represented a “specific profit” for the pro-independence leaders.
This doesn’t solely have an effect on solely the convicted and escaped. Twenty senior officers of the Generalitat have been additionally pending this reform in 2017, and they’re accused of embezzlement. The finest recognized are Josep María Jové, right-hand man of Oriol Junqueras within the Ministry of Economy; and Lluis Salvador, former Secretary of the Treasury. They and the previous director of companies of the Vice Presidency, Natalia Garriga, are awaiting trial within the TSJ of Catalonia. The remainder of these accused of embezzlement, additionally public prices, are divided between courtroom 13 of Barcelona, the primary to open proceedings, and courtroom 18.
The Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office
After Judge Llarena’s order, it was time to take heed to the place of the Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office, depending on the Government. In neither of the 2 circumstances have they requested him to think about using public cash within the independence course of to be delicate embezzlement.
In their writings, neither the prosecutors nor the State legal professional make any touch upon the crime of embezzlement. That is to say, they settle for the Justice of the Peace’s thesis pretty much as good and help it in what refers to embezzlement.
And even, each accusations are harder than the choose in the case of understanding the repeal of the crime of sedition. Where Llarena mentioned that prosecution for the brand new kind of aggravated public dysfunction was not continuing and left him in disobedience, these two estates say sure, that he must be prosecuted primarily based on this crime that entails between three and 5 years in jail and as much as eight of disqualification.
According to Llarena, they neither slot in nor might they be charged as a result of they didn’t exist on the time of the method and prosecuted them for disobedience, which doesn’t carry jail sentences and has a disqualification of as much as two years. Now we have now to see how the Justice of the Peace responds to those assets.
The backfire?
Jurists of various sensibilities agree with Llarena and affirm that the leaders of the procés dedicated critical embezzlement and that there isn’t any different interpretation, that’s, they help the Government’s thesis.
But there are additionally those that consider that, in actuality, the Government did wish to decriminalize the method to favor its ERC associate, though the push has performed a trick on it. This is the case of José María de Pablo, who helps Pablo Llarena’s arguments concerning embezzlement, however believes that the Government didn’t have in mind the that means that judges give to revenue.
1/ After the repeal of sedition and the discount of embezzlement, how does the legal horizon of the method leaders change -in my authorized opinion?
PART ONE: THE EMBEZZLEMENT 🧵👇
— José María de Pablo 🇺🇦 (@chemadepablo) January 14, 2023 Waiting for the trial courtroom
Llarena is the one who has the Puigdemont case in his palms, however the courtroom that sentenced Junqueras and eight different pro-independence leaders for crimes of sedition and/or embezzlement can be there. The Chamber, chaired by Manuel Marchena, requested all events final week how they need to interpret the reform.
The opinion of those judges would be the one that really weighs. But it appears troublesome for them to deviate from the factors of their roommate.
In truth, the convicts of Junts have determined to not file any enchantment. According to his protection sources, they consider that the Supreme Court has already decided and that Llarena’s order is written “in collusion” with the courtroom. That is to say, that Marchena and the remainder of the magistrates of the method are going to reply in the identical option to Llarena and that every thing is “cooked”.
ERC and Puigdemont will battle
But on the opposite facet are the defenses of the ERC politicians Oriol Junqueras, Raül Romeva and Dolors Bassa, who will current one other argument. That no crime has been dedicated and that by eliminating sedition, embezzlement has declined, as a result of it was carried out to commit against the law that not exists.
It is one other state of affairs on which the Chamber should reply, which is able to determine if Oriol Junqueras can stand for election this 12 months or if he ought to stay disabled for a protracted time period.