The judge of the National Court Manuel García Castellón has taken 24 hours to respond to Switzerland after refusing to provide information about the general secretary of ERC, Marta Rovira. The instructor warns that international treaties signed by both countries prohibit rejecting the request for judicial assistance based on political reasons when it involves a crime of terrorism, as is this case.
García-Castellón sent a rogatory commission to the Swiss authorities to help him locate Rovira’s address in Switzerland, once she had refused to give her address in court. In addition, the magistrate requested information on account numbers linked to the Tsunami Democràtic platform, responsible for the unrest in Catalonia following the procés ruling in October 2019.
The judge sees it as “inadmissible” that Switzerland has questioned whether his request is politically motivated, when at the same time the Swiss authorities have asked the investigator for information on the processing of the amnesty law.
García Castellón recalls that, in the Kingdom of Spain, as well as in the democracies of the EU, the function of judges “is to judge and enforce what is judged” and adds that the Judicial Branch is a separate and independent power from the legislative and the executive. and that, therefore, it is not the function of judges to make laws or participate in their drafting, nor is it the function of the legislator or the executive to interfere in the function of judging, qualifying or sentencing.
It indicates that in the communication received by the authorities of the Swiss Confederation, this instructor is urged to give “explanations” about a law that “is being prepared” of which the executing authority has learned “through the press.” For the instructor, “the explanation is manifestly inadmissible and cannot be substantiated by this magistrate, without entering into more substantive considerations.”
Furthermore, he emphasizes that, in a State with separate powers, it is not up to judges to formulate advisory opinions on laws in progress, or hypotheses on regulations that are not published or in force, as is undoubtedly the case in Switzerland. This magistrate, the judge warns, “is unaware of any issue related to the norm cited in the communication, and he is also unable to realize what interest it may have for someone responding to a request of a jurisdictional nature, to question a hypothetical non-approved norm.”
In his order, the judge considers that the request for an explanation contained in the Swiss communication in relation to the possible consequences of an amnesty law in relation to the members of the Tsunami Democratic platform and the investigated Marta Rovira is “striking”.
The judge writes that it is still “incongruous” for Switzerland to question the judge’s political motivation and then ask him for information about a law that is still being processed in Parliament, “outside the strict jurisdictional framework in which this class must be heard.” of requests.”
For this reason, García-Castellón points out “political bias” to the person responsible for the response of the rogatory commission, which arrived at the Court yesterday, after passing through the Ministry of Justice. The judge also takes the opportunity to explain that the request to find Rovira’s address has been made through judicial means and not the police, understanding that it is the most respectful of Rovira’s rights.
