The Second Room of the Supreme Court has dismissed this Monday to admit to processing the complaint for the crime of insults presented by the President of the Generalitat, Quim Torra, against the president of the PP, Pablo Casado, "not see evidence of crime," as announced by the Court in a press release. The complaint denounced that Casado had referred to Torra as "unbalanced" for being, in his opinion, a supporter of a "bloodshed".
Married pronounced these words in an party rally in Barcelona held in mid December of last year. It was during the presentation of the PP candidate for the City of Barcelona, Josep Bou, when the president of the popular assured, in reference to Torra, that "we must be unbalanced to write about the Spaniards that we are scavengers, hyenas and vipers" and he insisted: "You have to be tremendously unbalanced to say in your land that you are wishing the Government to send you the tanks. And you have to be very unbalanced to say you crave the Slovenian way; that is, the civil war that cost 63 dead and hundreds of wounded. "
The room only shows understanding for the trouble of Torra but, on the other hand, rejects that these expressions can be criminal. "Although the plaintiff's complaint is understandable, it is not possible to subsume in the criminal law the verbal excess for political purposes made in the middle of an electoral campaign speech," the resolution states, adding that doing so would imply penalizing "the numerous excesses rhetoricians of the electoral rallies ". In the opinion of the Court, in this and in most cases, freedom of expression and information should prevail ".
Although the complainant's complaint is understandable, it is not possible to subsume in the criminal law the verbal excess for political purposes made in the middle of an electoral campaign speech "
According to the note, the Supreme Court analyzes the collision of two rights, that of Torra's honor, and that of Casado's freedom of expression. But he also frames these words in "the climate of political tension existing recently in Catalonia." In this context, the room believes that Casado only wants to "highlight the deficiencies of the political opponent".
The ruling of the Supreme Court is also based on the doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which considers that freedom of expression not only covers opinions or ideas that do not offend, but also "those that clash, offend or disquiet". "This is what pluralism, tolerance and the spirit of openness want, without which there is no 'democratic society,'" the Supreme Court states in its resolution.