The judge of the National Court Manuel García-Castellón insists on continuing to investigate the crime of terrorism as a crime of terrorism. Democratic Tsunami case, despite the opposition of the Prosecutor’s Office. In the order with which he rejects the last appeal of the public ministry – presented against the decision to send a reasoned statement to the Supreme Court for it to decide whether to investigate the fugitive former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont, the ERC leader Marta Rovira (also on the run) and 10 other people―, the magistrate remains in his positions. García-Castellón assures that, far from the evidence deflating with the progress of the investigation, the documentation recently added to the case has allowed “consolidating […] that the initial qualification thesis [como delito de terrorismo] it appears, at this initial moment, as plausible.” In his resolution, the judge charges against the public ministry for arguing that, in reality, the investigation has so far only shown signs of a crime of aggravated public disorder.
García-Castellón highlights as an indication of the existence of a crime of terrorism the call by Tsunami for an unreported camping and demonstration attended by 7,000 people during the day of reflection prior to the general elections of November 10, 2019. The magistrate believes that with both mobilizations this group sought to “subvert the constitutional order, or seriously suppress or destabilize the functioning of the political institutions or the economic or social structures of the State, or force public powers to carry out an act or to abstain. to do so,” in addition to “seriously disturbing the public peace.” For this reason, he believes that both actions conform to “the definition of the crime of terrorism contained in the international treaties and agreements that Spain has signed.”
The magistrate also details in his order which documents recently incorporated into the case have reinforced, in his opinion, the classification as terrorism of the protests called by Tsunami Democràtic, some of them violent, that took place in Catalonia after the Supreme Court ruling was announced. condemned several leaders of the process in October 2019. Specifically, it details three reports prepared by the Mossos d’Esquadra about the events at El Prat airport on October 14, 2019, when a crowd collapsed the facility; as well as the proceedings that a court in L’Hospitalet de Llobregat opened following the death, on that day, of a traveler due to cardiac arrest, and the appearance papers in the case of two police officers who were seriously injured in the altercations of four days later in Barcelona.
The Mossos, in their response to the court, detailed to the judge that they were not aware that any deaths had occurred as a result of the altercations at the El Prat airport (one of the facts that the judge has used since November to insist on investigating the events such as terrorism); The emergency services separated that death from the riots; and the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia informed the National Court that there was no investigation into the death, since it was due to natural causes. Despite all this, García-Castellón emphasizes in the order that this documentation has allowed him to appreciate “the existence of criminal acts that, from the initial classification, have the character of a terrorist crime.” And he then insists on considering Tsunami Democràtic, the group that instigated the protests, as a “terrorist organization.”
The judge takes advantage of his resolution to launch a harsh criticism of the Prosecutor’s Office. Thus, he reminds him that the public ministry is the “body whose mission is to promote the action of justice in defense of legality,” and reproaches him for not seeing the crime of terrorism in the caso Tsunami despite “the forcefulness, quantity and clarity of the evidence that allows the initial qualification to be sustained” as such. For this reason, he invites the Prosecutor’s Office to “reflect.” It is one more step in the battle that the magistrate has had with the Prosecutor’s Office for this case since the beginning of November, at which time García-Castellón decided to accelerate the case in the midst of negotiations between the PSOE and Junts for the investiture of Pedro Sánchez. The investigations, initiated by the judge four years ago, were from the first moment classified as terrorism, but only two months ago the magistrate expressly targeted Puigdemont and Rovira for this crime.
Then, García-Castellón named a dozen people as accused, including Puigdemont and Rovira, both fugitives. After an extensive report provided by the Civil Guard, García-Castellón considered that he had sufficient evidence to investigate the suspects for terrorism for their participation in the creation of the Democratic Tsunami movement despite the fact that the word terrorism was not used in said police document to refer to it. refer to the protests. Following this ruling by the judge, issued on November 6, the public ministry presented a first appeal to the Criminal Court. The prosecutor insisted that there was not enough evidence to charge the pro-independence leaders and also ruled out the crime of terrorism (only considering possible aggravated public disorders). If the case loses the classification of terrorism, García-Castellón and the National Court would lose jurisdiction and the case would have to be sent to the courts of Catalonia.
What affects the most is what happens closest. So you don’t miss anything, subscribe.
However, before the Criminal Chamber ruled, the magistrate ordered the investigation to be referred to the Supreme Court, since two of those named were qualified: Puigdemont, for being a MEP; and Rubén Wagensberg, who is an ERC deputy and member of the Parliamentary Bureau. To this last decision, the Prosecutor’s Office presented the appeal that the judge has now rejected.
In its brief, the Prosecutor’s Office maintained that the judge had elevated the case to the Supreme Court “without any basis, without new proven facts” and without there being “new indications of criminal responsibility regarding those accused” (Puigdemont and Wagensberg). He also considered that García-Castellón had modified his own resolution from 15 days earlier in which he stated that it was not yet appropriate to transfer the case to the Supreme Court, violating a precept of the Judiciary Law. In his order this Thursday, the magistrate flatly rejects all of these arguments from the Prosecutor’s Office, including those of a procedural nature.
The context of the amnesty law
García-Castellón pointed out Puigdemont and Rovira for alleged crimes of terrorism just when the PSOE promoted – with the aim of achieving the support of Junts and ERC for the investiture of Pedro Sánchez – the amnesty law for those accused of the process. This amnesty does not cover either “intentional acts against people that would have resulted in death” or terrorism crimes for which a final sentence has been imposed. The rest of the crimes linked to process —including those of terrorism without a final sentence, that is, the case involving Puigdemont and Rovira— would be amnestied. However, ERC and Junts are not confident and want it to be clearer in the law that all crimes linked to processwithout exception and even if there is no final sentence, they will be amnestied.
to continue reading
_