Wed. Aug 21st, 2019

Prosecutor's Office, State Advocacy and Vox respond today to the defense's allegations

Fiscalía, Abogacía del Estado y Vox responden hoy a las alegaciones de las defensas


The Supreme Court The trial for the Catalan independence process resumes on Tuesday in a second day in which the accusations will be given (Prosecutor's Office, State Advocacy and Vox) to respond to the defense's allegations.

The president of the court, Manuel Marchena, has quoted at ten o'clock in the morning to the twelve defendants, their defenses and the three accusations to continue the oral hearing. Once the Public Prosecutor's Office, State Attorney's Office and Vox's public accusation rule on the preliminary issues raised by the defenses, the court will decide how it resolves the previous issues: whether on the fly, if it waits for the sentence or if it stops the trial to analyze them.





The secretary general of Vox, Javier Ortega Smith

The secretary general of Vox, Javier Ortega Smith
(Dani Duch)

The foreseeable thing is that the hearing continues and it is the turn of the statements of the accused, the first of them the former vice-president of the Generalitat Oriol Junqueras.


First session

In the session of the morning and the afternoon it was perceived that the trial by the procés has two ways. One is more political and looks at Europe. The other, is more technical and has fixed the view in the room where the view is celebrated. In the afternoon session, these two directions were defined by the sentences of two of the lawyers. Benet Salellas, defender of Jordi Cuixart, said that "this trial is a defeat for Spanish society." On the other hand, Mariano Bergés, lawyer of Dolors Bassa, defined that "the rebellion is what the sentence of 23-F says".

The first lawyer of the defenses to take the floor in the afternoon was Francesc Homs, on behalf of Josep Rull, who only adhered to the same allegations of his colleagues in the defense of Jordi Turull and Jordi Sànchez.

Then came the plea of ​​Benet Salellas, a lawyer of Jordi Cuixart and ex-deputy of the CUP in the Parlament de Catalunya. The first thing he did was to argue that the State Attorney has filed an erroneous accusation against his sponsor, as this body acts in search of possible damages to the Treasury and Cuixart has nothing to do with public funds. In a similar vein, he requested that the court prune the writ of accusation, because imputations are formulated that are not criminal, but defense of fundamental rights. Cuixart is, according to his lawyer, a representative of civil society that has exercised the defense of fundamental rights. And then came the definition of Salellas on what fundamental rights are, always with allusions to judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), for example several that have condemned Russia, Azerbaijan or Turkey.





The twelve independence leaders accused by the Catalan sovereignty process that led to the celebration of the 1-O and the unilateral declaration of independence of Catalonia (DUI), on the bench of the Supreme Court

The twelve independence leaders accused by the Catalan sovereignty process that led to the celebration of the 1-O and the unilateral declaration of independence of Catalonia (DUI), on the bench of the Supreme Court
(Emilio Naranjo / EFE)

In his speech, the lawyer explained that the criticism of the public powers is practically unlimited and that they have to support the demonstrations, to add that what happened in Catalonia has been, precisely, an exercise of civil rights. They are accused, he added, for participating in peaceful demonstrations. Therefore, he said, this trial can amount to "a trial of fundamental rights or against fundamental rights."

He added that "the world of human rights is pending in this trial", and pointed the direction of the resources to Europe to ensure that if the accusations are not modified "the next condemnation of the ECHR will not be to Turkey or Russia, but to the State Spanish". Benet Salellas ended his plea by pointing out "this trial is a collective defeat of Spanish society."

If the turn of the lawyer of Cuixart had a marked political aspect, that of the lawyer of Dolors Bassa, Mariano Bergés, maintained a more technical character. First, to argue that what happened in Catalonia was a rebellion, according to the characteristics defined in the Penal Code. "The rebellion is what the ruling of 23-F says," he defended. He also requested that reports from the General State Intervention and from the Legal Department of the Department of the Economy of the Generalitat be included, stating that no public money was spent in the 1-0. In addition, he also lamented the little time he has had to prepare aspects of his defense and explained that he only had two hours to prepare his response to the indictment, which led Bassa to prison. In this particular criticized the imprisonment of his client, which is only on suspicion, because he returned from Belgium and was presented whenever it was claimed by the court, and slipped the problem of the escaped: "has no control over the conduct of third parties."





The president of the court and rapporteur of the sentence, Manuel Marchena (c), along with the magistrates, Andrés Martínez Arrieta (i) and Juan Ramón Berdugo (d), during the trial of the 'procés'.

The president of the court and rapporteur of the sentence, Manuel Marchena (c), along with the magistrates, Andrés Martínez Arrieta (i) and Juan Ramón Berdugo (d), during the trial of the 'procés'.
(Emilio Naranjo / EFE)

Olga Arderiu, defender of Carme Forcadell, demanded, like others of her bank colleagues, to declare in this hearing Puigdemont and Rovira and also pointed to Europe, requesting that a question be asked to the European Court of Justice about the evidence that has been presented in this process. "This cause is political," he said, and argued that what happened were parliamentary acts protected by inviolability, adding that he does not understand why the Parliamentary Bureau will be judged in Barcelona and she is being held in Madrid. Rhetorically, he asked himself if he is on the bench for being who he is and for his political convictions. Almost all the lawyers who intervened on Tuesday asked that this case be joined by everything investigated by the investigating court 13 of Barcelona, ​​because a good part of the evidence of the accusation is fed by this procedure and not everyone knows it. This is causing them defenselessness, they said, just as the defenses have not yet had access to all the documentation that is being considered in this trial.





Judith Jené (representative of Meritxell Borràs) and Josep Riba (defender of Carles Mundó), gave short speeches also of an eminently technical nature, in which they highlighted the evidence they now demand to sustain the innocence of their clients. The afternoon session was closed by Pablo Molins, Santi Vila's lawyer, who claimed that his sponsored case should be sent to Barcelona, ​​in order to be entitled to a second instance. In his opinion, it makes no sense to be tried directly in the Supreme Court, since on October 27 he was not a deputy and resigned as a member of the Govern before the DUI was voted. If the Mesa de Parlament will be judged in Catalonia because the accusations do not find rebellious biases in its members, less will be the only member of the Govern who "marked distances before what was coming".







Source link