As of Thursday, the magistrates who tried the independence leaders of 1-O must determine what place they undertake when deciphering the repeal of the crime of sedition and the discount of embezzlement penalties in that case. The matter is carried out on two fronts within the Supreme Court: the one which impacts these convicted resembling Junqueras, which is the duty of the court docket presided over by Manuel Marchena; and the a part of Puigdemont and the fugitives, within the palms of Judge Pablo Llarena.
The time period to answer the court docket ends this Thursday, and though there are nonetheless writings to be registered, it has already change into clear what are the arguments which might be going to be on the desk. The Prosecutor’s Office, for instance, has not but introduced its argument to the court docket, though it has carried out so earlier than Judge Llarena, who continued to prosecute Carles Puigemont and the remainder of the fugitive former ministers.
In truth, it is extremely probably that the court docket presided over by Manuel Marchena doesn’t stray removed from what the investigating Justice of the Peace Llarena has already indicated, who issued an indictment by which he maintained the arrest warrants for embezzlement in its most aggravated sort, but it surely left sedition in a criminal offense of disobedience.
What Llarena stated: 1-O doesn’t match into the crime of aggravated public dysfunction
Pablo Llarena was the primary to present an interpretation to the reform of the Penal Code. In an order, which was an allegation in opposition to the reform and has already been harshly appealed by defendants Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín, Clara Ponsatí and Lluis Puig, it dominated that:
When the crime of sedition disappeared and will not be charged, there was no different possibility than to go away him in disobedience, as a result of based on his thesis the crime of aggravated public dysfunction can’t be utilized. It can’t be utilized as a result of it doesn’t match the info It can’t be utilized as a result of one of these public dysfunction didn’t exist in 2017, when the independence referendum of 1-O was held The embezzlement stays at its most severe sort, the discount in sentences doesn’t apply meant for individuals who should not for revenue. The revenue motive, based on Llarena, doesn’t essentially entail an enrichment or appropriation of public funds for oneself or third events, however on this case, they had been diverted for an finish exterior the legislation. What would it not imply?: Since they’ve already been pardoned, it might don’t have any impact on jail sentences. As for these of disqualification, they might not profit significantly. Disobedience would have a disqualification of as much as two years. The most extreme type of embezzlement is punishable by as much as 20 years of disqualification. The Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office: aggravated public dysfunction and severe embezzlement may be charged
The State legal professional, which led the accusation for sedition, and the Prosecutor’s Office, which throughout the trial defended the existence of a rebel, agree this time of their writings. None of them has but answered the court docket, however they’ve answered Judge Llarena, and the logical factor is that they interpret the rule in the identical manner for each the escapees and the convicted.
Sedition: the 2 accusations disagree with Pablo Llarena and consider that the sentence of the procés contains “the everyday parts” of the crime of aggravated public dysfunction, and that the reform of the penal code permits it to be subsumed in it. Embezzlement: they don’t even handle it within the writings to Pablo Llarena about Puigdemont, as a result of they agree with the Justice of the Peace that essentially the most aggravated sort must be maintained. What does it imply?: once more few adjustments for the defendants within the face of disqualifications, as a result of aggravated embezzlement continues. Junqueras asks for acquittal
Oriol Junqueras, Raül Romeva, Carme Forcadell and Dolors Bassa, ask the Supreme Court for acquittal in three writings to which NIUS has agreed. The particulars can be given at a press convention this Wednesday, however his writing is consistent with what was introduced from the day the reform got here into pressure.
His lawyer, Andreu Van den Eynde, defends that the repeal of sedition requires an “computerized overview” that declares that there was no crime and that there’s “absence of any legal legal responsibility”. aggravated public issues as a result of they don’t reply to the story of the sentence and neither does the disobedience story, as a result of they had been by no means accused of it. As for embezzlement, in his opinion it might be an “unfair administration” that based on his protection, exercised by Andreu Van den Eynde, can’t be utilized as a result of the court docket by no means raised it and it might additionally disappear. As it’s an instrumental crime, that’s, carried out to commit the principal, it’s deleted. What would it not imply?: If they persuade the court docket, Junqueras might stand within the 2023 elections. Puigdemont, who rejects severe embezzlement, accuses Llarena of twisting the idea of revenue
Carles Puigdemont has so much at stake, as a result of in his case he has not but been tried. In his letter, he fees Llarena for insisting on persecuting him by skipping immunity as a MEP and denies any crime. Regarding the embezzlement, he rejects that he may be prosecuted for him within the aggravated sort of him:
In his writing, which accuses the Justice of the Peace of issuing a “political” decision, he remembers that he has by no means been prosecuted for revenue. And he accuses him of finishing up “a mutation of the info” in an effort to deprive him of his liberty. Puigdemont’s letter additionally raises the shortage of competence of the Supreme Court and the violation of rights. He calls for that Llarena deactivate the arrest warrants in opposition to him for each crimes, since he alleges that after the reform they don’t exist and he can’t be detained as a result of he has immunity as a member of the European Parliament. Ponsatí rejects the crime of disobedience
The former minister Clara Ponsatí and the final secretary of ERC, Marta Rovira, had been the one ones who had been sued just for disobedience and Ponsatí has already appealed her prosecution for that crime for which three former ministers had been convicted within the Supreme Court: Meritxell Borrás, Carles Mundó and Santi Rovira.
Ponsatí’s lawyer, who is identical as Puigdemont’s, developed in Ponsatí’s enchantment the the reason why, based on him, one can not converse of disobedience,
The letter alleges that disobedience is a criminal offense that was by no means charged in opposition to them and subsequently can’t be charged now. It is just not “approvable”, says the lawyer, who above all factors out that it’s a prescribed crime that can’t be placed on the desk at the moment. The convicts of Junts surrender enchantment
Although at first they’d raised the opportunity of requesting acquittal on the grounds that when sedition declined, embezzlement would disappear, as an instrumental crime, lastly, Jordi Turull, Josep Rull, and Jordi Sánchez haven’t carried out so.
As convicted, they needed to file their enchantment in court docket, however after seeing Llarena’s order, they’ve given up interesting. They are satisfied that Judge Llarena has drafted his decision in settlement with the magistrates who tried them, with whom he shares a room and based on them, authorship. Cuixart doesn’t really feel “repaired” by the repeal of embezzlement
Jordi Cuixart, the previous president of Òmnium Cultural, has addressed the Supreme Court however solely to say that he doesn’t really feel “repaired” by the repeal of the crime of sedition, the one one for which he was convicted.
He is ready for the Strasbourg Human Rights Court, earlier than which he sued Spain for violation of elementary rights. Cuixart, retired a 12 months in the past from the presidency of the civic platform Òmnium Cultural, is just not affected by the accusation of embezzlement, however rejects that the repeal of sedition is of any use to him, after three years and eight months in jail. And now that?
The Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office must current their appeals earlier than the court docket presided over by Marchena and perhaps they may handle him within the sense that they’ve carried out within the case of Puigdemont.
Later, the magistrates will examine all of the arguments of the events and can apply the reform of the Penal Code on this case. The accusing events, Judge Llarena, and completely different jurists consulted, agree that aggravated embezzlement is properly utilized, and it’s assumed that this would be the place of the magistrates within the case of the convicted, which might keep disqualifications virtually the identical.
The predominant doubts are in the way in which by which the repeal of the crime of sedition can be understood and in whether or not it may be subsumed in a criminal offense of public dysfunction or in one in every of disobedience. In which might be the magistrates, who in just a few days will difficulty their decision.