In the middle of Holy Week and in a practically empty Parliament, the second secretary of the Bureau, Aurora Madaula, has called a press conference this Wednesday to step out of the growing pressure that Junts is receiving to step aside from the presidency of the Chamber to Laura Borrà s.
The devised strategy, which has the approval of the party executive and the parliamentary group, as Madaula has highlighted, consists of redoubling the bet by submitting a request to the Board in which Junts requests that the decision of 28 be revoked July of last year for which Borràs was suspended from rights and duties as a deputy.
Madaula, who has appeared together with deputy Jaume Alonso-Cuevillas, who has responded to the most technical questions from his experience as a lawyer, has pointed out that the ruling of the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) that sentenced Borrà s last week to four and a half years in prison and thirteen years of disqualification for prevarication and document falsification establishes that there was no personal gain, therefore, in Junts’ opinion, there is no link with corruption.
Specifically, Madula and Cuevillas have referred to page 105 of the judgment to argue their position, which is based on the fact that for corruption to exist there must be personal gain or economic damage to public coffers, something that, they have underlined, is explicitly ruled out in the sentence.
Although Junts questions the sentence as a whole and is convinced that Borrà s will be acquitted after the appeal to higher instances that is already underway, he clings to what the judge expresses on the aforementioned page of the sentence to claim that, at this moment , what the Board of Parliament must do is revoke its decision, based on the application of a point of the regulation, 25.4, which according to Cuevillas is unconstitutional and “should not exist” and which, in addition, several international organizations have questioned because It has been applied without waiting for a final judgment.
Junts insists that the Borrà s case is “manual lawfare” inasmuch as it has entailed the violation of the fundamental rights of its president and has urged those who defend that it is about corruption to read the sentence of the TSJC, since the conviction for Embezzlement does not imply, in Madaula’s opinion, personal gain for either Borrà s or IsaÃas Herrero, who was the beneficiary of the Institució de les Lletres Catalanes (ILL) contracts and who worked even below market prices, according to indicated Cuevillas.
The deputy and lawyer has insisted that no international legal system, not even the Spanish one, considers corruption cases in which there is no personal or third-party profit or damage to the institutions, and that there was no bribery in the fragmentation of contracts for which Borràs sat on the bench. In this sense, he has recalled that the president of Junts has not been asked for civil liability in the sentence and she has not had to proceed with any compensation.
