He Supreme Court considers the possibility of promoting new questions of unconstitutionality against the Amnesty Lawwhich could affect all proceedings that the High Court is waiting to resolve and which would be suspended until the Constitutional Court rules on the rule.
This week, the Guarantees Court unanimously admitted the question of unconstitutionality raised by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, which refers to two specific cases concerning three people found guilty of disturbing public order and attacks during the demonstrations in Girona and Barcelona after the trial was concluded.
But there could be more, as legal sources inform EFE that the Supreme Court’s doubts about the constitutionality of the amnesty are reflected in all the procedures underway in the process, which opens the door to new questions before the TC. Unlike what happens with the appeals for unconstitutionality, whose deadline expired last Wednesday, the sources recall that the case is not subject to any deadline.
The two scenarios considered by the Supreme Court
At the beginning of July, the Chamber had already requested the accusations (Prosecutor’s Office, Lawyers and Vox) and the defenses of the former Catalan vice-president. Oriol Junqueras and former ministers Raül Romeva, Jordi Turull and Dolors Bassa to present their arguments on the relevance of raising a question of unconstitutionality by the crime of disobedience.
Then, the Supreme Court stated that “declaring the crime of disobedience amnestied and, consequently, the partial archiving of the execution obliges us to dispel the doubt of constitutionality that the legislative mandate raises due to its possible opposition” to three articles of the Magna. Map: that of the principle of legality (9.3), which guarantees the right to equality (14) and that of the exercise of jurisdictional power of judges (117.3).
On July 1, Judge Pablo Llarena did the same in the case against the former president. Carles Puigdemont with former ministers Antoni Comín and Lluis Puig. Puigdemont He warned that proposing amnesty to the TC represents “a waste of time” that can be interpreted as an attempt to “delay” its application, given that he considers that the rule has no unconstitutional flaw.
In addition to the two most high-profile cases, there are other proceedings that have reached the Supreme Court via an appeal in cassation against convictions (there are also acquittals) for disobedience and unrestThe High Court’s doubts concern how to formalise its position on these issues.
One option is to promote new issues of unconstitutionalitywhich could give rise to several issues – up to seven -, which would lead to the suspension of the proceedings. Or, to declare that since there is a question that has already been admitted for processing, since the doubts of the Supreme Court on the amnesty law are based on the same reasoning, it is agreed to suspend the rest of the proceedings concerned before the higher court. court pending the constitutional decision.
Current allegations, abstentions and challenges
The magistrates are working with these two scenarios while waiting to receive some allegations from the parties in the proceedings and, also, to resolve the challenges made in some of these cases and to complete the rooms after some abstentions. This is the case of the former adviser Meritxell Serret, sentenced to one year of ban; as well as four members of the Parliamentary Council of 2017: Lluís Corominas, Anna Simó, Ramona Barrufet and Lluís Guiósentenced to four months of ban. Also that of the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Roger Torrent and the pro-independence members of the Council he chaired in Parliament, acquitted after being accused of disobedience to the Constitutional Court in dealing with sovereign resolutions and disapproval of the Monarchy.
Another procedure concerns the former mayor of Sabadell Matíes Secarrant, sentenced to four months of disqualification for not having prevented the illegal 1-O referendum in the city.
