The Criminal Chamber of the Court has endorsed the proceedings agreed by the investigating judge of the Democratic Tsunami case, Manuel García-Castellón, on January 26, including those aimed at investigating whether this platform aimed to act in step of the King’s entourage on a visit to Barcelona in July 2020. The room, in addition, rejects that it is a prospective investigation and understands that the investigation is “a success”.
In an interlocutory order, the third section of the Criminal Chamber rejects the appeal of one of the investigated, to which the prosecutor joined, against the interlocutory order of García-Castellón in which he agreed to a battery of investigative proceedings, among which Tsunami aimed to act alongside the King’s entourage during a visit to Barcelona in July 2020. In addition, it requested information in relation to the incidents that occurred at El Prat airport on October 14, 2019, the the death of a French citizen on that date or the closures on the AP-7 motorway between November 11 and 13, in the context of the protests against the judgment of the process issued by the Supreme Court.
The court responds that what the court intends with its investigations is to delve into the knowledge of the facts, in which there are injured persons and the possible use of instruments capable of damaging and harming.
The court denies that it is a prospective investigation but instead “deepens, investigates, always pursues the maximum knowledge of what would have happened”, of which it always has (…) “news of the crime that it is obliged to verify and expand”.
The court also rules on the proceedings agreed to investigate the death of a French citizen and the cutting of the AP-7 highway and which, according to the appellant, ended with filing resolutions for the corresponding territorial courts.
The interlocutory statement explains that the appellant does not mention the legal precept violated by the investigating judge in order to clarify these facts which are for the benefit of the entire process. “There is a considerable qualitative difference between the overall view with which the court proceeds, given the nature of the crimes it investigates, and the absolutely compartmentalized view of the courts of the territory. From this consideration is born the success and relevance of the investigations” of the investigating judge, she points out.
