News from Strasbourg. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has demanded information about the “consequences” of the amnesty law on the independence leaders who sued Spain for the violation of fundamental rights that, in their opinion, the Supreme Court carried out in the cause of the process.
The ECtHR’s letter, dated October 18, implies that the Strasbourg judges want official corroboration of something that is already public and widely reported by the Spanish and European press, that is, the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant amnesty to the former ministers.
The judges’ request comes after Spain, through the State Attorney’s Office, fully supported the Supreme Court’s actions in a document that mentioned the approval of the amnesty law, but completely ignored the Supreme Court’s refusal. High Court to apply the law to sovereigntist leaders.
In a letter, published by El Nacional and to which elDiario.es has had access, the ECtHR demands that both the State Attorney’s Office and the sovereigntist leaders inform it about the “application” of the amnesty law as well as its “consequences.” ” in each of the nine sovereigntist leaders who were condemned by the Supreme Court and who sued Spain for various violations of fundamental rights.
The judges have given the parties until November 15 to respond. The ECtHR is the European body before which the pardoned prisoners of the process have hopes that their complaints of violation of fundamental rights that a majority of judges of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts have rejected will be accepted.
After showing interest in the case, the ECtHR admitted the independence demands for processing last year and gave Spain a deadline for allegations. Among other questions, the European judges asked Spain if the Supreme Court applied the crime of sedition “expansively” or if the leaders of the process were convicted for a “legitimate exercise” of their rights to freedom of association and expression.
The State Attorney’s Office, in its brief of allegations last August, omitted the fact that the Supreme Court refused to apply the amnesty, which was taken advantage of by Jordi Pina, Jordi Turull’s lawyer, to remember the ECHR that the Supreme Court had not applied the amnesty law to his client.
In its request, the ECtHR reminds the parties of their duty toand report “any further developments” regarding ongoing lawsuits. In his response to the ECHR, lawyer Jordi Pina maintains that the amnesty law “has not produced any effect” on his client, which is why he remains disqualified from holding any public office until 2030.
The agreement and the jurisprudence of the ECtHR require that plaintiffs be able to prove throughout the entire procedure their status as victims of rights violations.
If the amnesty had been applied, the demands of the leaders of the process would have had more options to be archived, although the ECtHR could have also decided to study the violations of rights reported during the investigation of the case, such as the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or preventive detention. The Supreme Court’s refusal to amnesty the leaders of the process, however, means that the ECHR cannot file the case directly and has to study it in depth.
#Strasbourg #court #asks #Spain #ministers #confirm #Supreme #Court #rejected #amnesty
