The Minister of the Presidency, Justice and Relations with the Courts, Félix Bolaños, called this Tuesday the Secretary General of the PP, Cuca Gamarra, to complain about what according to him represents a “change of mind” of “popular” regarding a legal modification that could benefit more than 40 ETA prisoners.
Bolaños called Gamarra to respond to the leader of the PP, who this morning sent a message to the minister demanding that the government stopped processing the law. In the same message he asked to speak to him, because at that time it was not possible due to the holding of the Council of Ministers.
According to sources in the Ministry of the Presidency, Bolaños questioned Gamarra about the “unexpected change of opinion of the PP“, after the journalistic information published yesterday on this law”, which showed that this reform, which He had the approval of the PPwas going to benefit ETA prisoners.
Since then, Genoa has denounced a The government “trick”asked Moncloa to rectify and withdraw the law and apologized to the victims of terrorism for what they describe as an “unjustifiable error”, given that they neglected the content of this reform and its possible consequences .
However, the government sources consulted consider that this is a “sudden change of opinion” of the PP which is also “difficult to explain” because, according to him, this rule “serves to apply European law in Spain”.
This same Tuesday, sources from Moncloa specified that The government has no plans to withdraw the law and will therefore continue his treatment. They also point out that the PP was aware of the consequences of this rule but is now forced to react in this way.
It is “impossible” that the PP does not know the texts
Finally, from the department led by Bolaños, they argue that those of Alberto Núñez Feijóo voted in favor of the law in Congress, like the rest of the parliamentary groups and in addition, They did not present any amendments in the Senate.
They also insist on the fact that the law “is supported by a favorable opinion from the Council of State” and recall that there is a preliminary ruling from the National Court “which already doubts the adequacy of our current legislation to community law” .
Furthermore, they emphasize that all these texts were public and well known and therefore consider that “it is impossible that the PP does not know them”. “It is exclusively up to this party to provide the relevant explanations for its change of opinion,” they conclude.
