State Attorney’s Office and Prosecutor’s Office will appeal the decision on amnesty

State Attorney’s Office and Prosecutor’s Office will appeal the decision on amnesty
State Attorney’s Office and Prosecutor’s Office will appeal the decision on amnesty

The Supreme Court’s recent decision on the amnesty law has generated a political and legal storm. The high court issued a ruling in which it interprets embezzlement in a restrictive manner, excluding the leaders of the independence process, such as Carles Puigdemont and Oriol Junqueras, from the pardon. This decision has sparked strong criticism from several allies of the Government and has been interpreted by the investiture partners as a poor application of the law by the Judiciary. However, the real dispute is legal and is about to intensify in the Supreme Court itself.

Legal sources have indicated that both the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office are preparing appeals against the Supreme Court’s decision. These appeals will be based on arguments similar to those of the dissenting opinion of Judge Ana Ferrer, who pointed out that the Supreme Court’s own doctrine in the case of the procés contradicts the recent decision to consider that there was personal enrichment. Ferrer argues that this interpretation is unprecedented and has been strongly criticized in both political and judicial circles.

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division is expected to reject these appeals, although it will have to provide solid arguments for doing so. From then on, a long process will begin that will probably end up in the Constitutional Court. The Government is confident that both the Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will support the amnesty and overturn the controversial interpretation of the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the Popular Party (PP) is clinging to this decision of the Supreme Court, criticising the Constitutional Court and accusing it of acting under the orders of the Government.

The Supreme Court’s decision was drafted by Manuel Marchena, president of the Criminal Chamber and a key figure in the recent major legal battles. However, Ana Ferrer, in her dissenting opinion, stressed that in previous decisions on the trial, no intention of personal enrichment was ever found. Ferrer warned that the Supreme Court’s new interpretation introduces a “new concept.”

Contradictions in the argument

Ferrer recalled that in the trial ruling and in other resolutions, the Supreme Court did not mention any personal financial benefit for the convicted. Now, the court seems to reinterpret the concept of enrichment to avoid applying the amnesty. This alleged contradiction has been carefully read by the Government and the Prosecutor’s Office, and it is expected to be central to the appeals that will be presented.

Both the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office have expressed their support for the amnesty, despite the Supreme Court’s decision to exclude the leaders of the procés. Ferrer’s arguments will be essential in trying to convince the court of his interpretation. Meanwhile, the Government is preparing for a prolonged battle that could last up to a year.

The Supreme Court’s decision comes at a time of high political tension in Spain. The amnesty law was sold by the government as a crucial step to resolve tensions in Catalonia and advance the peace process, even though it was demanded by the pro-independence parties to support the investiture of Pedro Sánchez. However, the court’s recent interpretation has complicated this panorama and unleashed a series of criticisms and debates. The legal battle that now begins will have profound implications both politically and legally for the future of the country.

The final resolution of this dispute will be closely watched not only in Spain, but also in the European Union, where the Catalan process has been a topic of ongoing interest. The outcome of this legal battle could set important precedents on the application of amnesty and the interpretation of the law in politically sensitive cases. @mundiario

Read more

For Latest Updates Follow us on Google News


PREV Dance becomes visible in the capital and the province
NEXT Stefanini Group bets on expansion in Central America