The indictment of the leaders of the ANC and Òmnium, dictated by Judge Lamela, would embarrass me if it were not for the feeling of injustice and the feeling of being attending a creative use of the Law again get some facts fit a blow mallet into a criminal type to then give thick strokes and cover the file to justify a preventive entry into prison.
It is not a matter at all political. There are no political prisoners in Spain. Neither now. Yes there have been and there will be judicial errors and voluntarisms when interpreting the law. It is not the first time that this happens in the National Court. It is not a secret that in the National Court sometimes resolutions are thrown by the seams, although I do not miss because a long time ago an old magistrate explained to me the fundamental role that the House had for the maintenance and support of the State.
The reason of State also moved unjust actions against the surroundings of ETA, some of which were finally disavowed, but the jail had sucked, hear. I’m just going to mention the Egunkaria case, in which preventive detention was ordered for five people and a newspaper was closed so that after a harsh sentence it became clear the constitutional violation that meant the closure and the acquittal of all those involved was proclaimed. Also, the closure of Egin was considered illegal and the defenses had been clamoring for years for Garzón’s “legal trap”. And so I could put more examples. Only in those years many considered that the ultimate goal of ending ETA and its struggle for independence justified covering a little noses and the same seems to be beginning to happen now with the Catalan secessionist attempt. It is the road of excess, I warned on Sunday and it is here.
So maybe there was so much interest in taking this matter to the National Court making a bobbin lace, going through the Criminal Code of Franco, to become competent to a court whose full judges already determined in 2008 that they were not competent for this crime . It is truly prodigious. That is why perhaps this case has not been investigated by anyone other than the social leaders and the Mossos, because any other responsible person above them would be subject to the TSJC and would lead to the loss of the already shaky competition. Seams are very tight, but they are not the only ones.
Lamela has to shore up sedition, where many see other offenses such as public disorder, damage and others, and it uses part of your car. Thus in the resolution it relates how, Cuixart and Sanchez acted in the demonstration “rising as its promoters”. You had to put the verb to lift even if it was with a shoehorn to build the type of sedition. That “rise publicly and tumultuarily.” So the judge stands as promoters, though lacking the Castilian thus, for none of them was erected as a promoter of the event at the time it came to be so for years. Lo riotously I guess is endorsed by the time the judge refers to citizens in the car calling them “the mass” “the crowd” and other synonyms to designate the protesters.
Thus we read extremely juicy paragraphs to illustrate a crime of sedition that relate to us as “although the appeals to the rallies were accompanied by the request that the rally be peaceful, no message was sent or communicated to the masses in any way that did not the official vehicles will be violated. ” Already know the future convenors of demonstrations: do not forget with the call to remember that the demonstration is peaceful, that you do not jump on vehicles, do not burn containers, do not spit on the police and do not put an etcetera since any action committed by People outside your control that are not included and warned in the call may complicate your life.
Once the clear nexus is forced between the objective type and the actions that are related, the subjective mood that moved the protesters is also constructed with a tinkle of voyeurism since the resistance was “a means to ensure the holding of the referendum and with of the proclamation of the independent republic of Catalonia. ” Something so directly inferible, said with total irony, that at this point we still do not really know if it happened.
And finished the flimsy edifice of the sedition that took place that day – because only what happened on 20 and 21 and nothing else is investigated here – one goes on to consider that both activists must enter prison because in their case there is not a of the constitutional causes to decree it but the three! Why are we going to fall short? There is a risk of the Jordis’ escape because “the penalties are very high”. I hope that now the judges of Spain will not be put as preventives to all those who are demanding high prison sentences. In addition “there is a risk of destruction of evidence” although the car is not made the slightest effort to motivate this issue since it must be the evidence of the alleged acts on 20 and 21 -no of nothing else- and is not reached to see what they can be. The magistrate could have bothered to enlighten us.
I look forward to the appeal of Cuixart and Sánchez’s lawyers. I want the Criminal Chamber to rule on the competence of the National Court in the crime of sedition and on the motivation of the decision to wrest from both the most precious thing for a human being that is freedom. I know that other judges of the National Court would never have dictated this car. I trust the system so I want to see when and how for this. They taught me that when a judge has any doubt, the slightest doubt, about the absolute need to preventively imprison someone, it is their duty to let him go free. And there is no need. Any. Justice can impose itself without forcing boundaries, because of its full power to do so.
