In extremis, the PSOE has agreed with the pro-independence parties to accept some transactional amendments to further extend the amnesty law, which is in full parliamentary debate. The pact has dealt with some modification to the crime of terrorism and the lifting of precautionary measures once the law comes into force.
These agreed amendments have been voted and approved today in the Justice Commission by twenty votes in favor and 17 against to be included in the final text that will be voted on in the plenary session of the Congress of Deputies as a preliminary step to sending it to the Senate.
At the last moment, the socialists have agreed to extend the amnesty for the crime of terrorism, although they maintain exceptions. In the current proposal, cases of terrorism linked to the process were amnestied as long as there was no final sentence. With the amendment, it is established that acts that manifestly and with direct intention cause serious violations are excluded.
In fact, in the first November agreement between PSOE and ERC before presenting the bill in the Congress of Deputies, the text was already in those terms. However, after a PSOE-Junts agreement a week later, it was decided to modify and withdraw that part to only include as an exception the cases of terrorism “with a final sentence.”
Now, with the agreed amendment that has been voted on in the Justice Commission, it is expanded to “acts classified as punishable terrorist crimes that have consisted of the commission of any of the conduct included in Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council as long as, manifestly and with direct intention, they have caused serious violations of human rights”.
Specifically, it is specified in those provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and in international humanitarian law,” as La Vanguardia has learned from parliamentary sources.
Article 2 and 3 of the European Convention refers to the right to life and the prohibition of torture. The special interest of the independentists in incorporating terrorism is due to the case opened in the National Court for terrorism and in which a dozen people are accused, including the former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont and the general secretary of ERC, Marta Rovira. , for the Democratic Tsunami case.
With this new amendment, the case of Judge Manuel García-Castellón would not be neutralized once the instructor has included in the case the death of a person during the riots at the El Prat airport promoted by Tsunami Democràtic. In addition, he has allowed twenty members of the security forces and bodies injured that day to appear in the case as injured parties in response to the trial ruling handed down by the Supreme Court on October 14, 2019.
Socialist sources explain that terrorism is maintained as a crime excluded from the application of the amnesty, standardizing its structure to the rest of the exclusions provided for in the law, also resorting to the parameters set by the European Convention.
Regarding precautionary measures, the pact has been aimed at modifying the term competent judge to “judge who is hearing the case” for the lifting of any precautionary measure as well as European, national or international arrest warrants. In this way, Carles Puigdemont guarantees that the orders and measures that weigh on him are immediately lifted, which would allow him to return to Spain once the law is approved.
Socialist sources maintain that this amendment clarifies in more detail the effects of the amnesty in the criminal field, providing greater legal certainty. Furthermore, they explain that the jurisdictional function of judges and magistrates is reinforced when applying these effects, especially with regard to the lifting of precautionary measures in the event of a possible suspension of the judicial process for any reason.
After the pact, article 4 of the law remains as follows: “Without prejudice to the provisions of article 163 of the Constitution and article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, after the entry into force of this law: The competent judicial body that, at all times, is hearing the case will order the immediate release of the beneficiaries of the amnesty who are in prison either because their provisional detention has been ordered or they are serving a sentence.”
Likewise, the article states that the immediate lifting of any precautionary measures of a personal or real nature that may have been adopted for actions or omissions included in the objective scope of this law will be agreed upon.
This article establishes that the judicial body that is hearing the case “will proceed to annul the search and capture orders and imprisonment of the people to whom this amnesty applies, as well as the national, European and international orders.” of detention”.
Point ‘c’ of this article has also been key in the negotiation to ensure that the precautionary measures are lifted once the law is approved regardless of what happens in the procedure. All the corrections are aimed at mitigating as much as possible the ability of the judges to paralyze the amnesty, who must apply the rule once it comes into force.
This section specifically states that the suspension of criminal proceedings for any reason will not prevent the lifting of those precautionary measures that have been agreed upon prior to the entry into force of this law and that imply the deprivation of the exercise of fundamental rights and public freedoms. In addition, the judge will have to end the custodial sentences, and criminal records derived from the conviction for the amnestied criminal act will be expunged.
During the Justice Commission, the PSOE Justice spokesperson, Francisco Aranda, has defended the law and the incorporated amendments. He has defended that today the Constitution “is stronger than ever.”
“The Constitution is not militant, it is not part, it belongs to everyone. The Constitution suffers when it is ignored,” he noted, before adding that “this reform is the consequence of a policy that has ensured that today Catalonia is not that of the 2017”.
For his part, Junts deputy Josep Maria Cervera has indicated that one of the objectives of the transactional amendments is “to cover all cases of fraudulent use of legal mechanisms to prevent an effective, efficient and rapid application of this law.” “A deferred amnesty is not amnesty,” he said.
Specifically, he pointed out that these modifications respond to “the need to overcome the imagination of some magistrates who want to include some facts in criminal types that we all know are in no way criminal.” “Treating the Catalan independence movement as terrorism is a legal aberration and a politicization of Justice that this law must also reverse,” she pointed out.
The rest of the amendments presented by the groups that had not been agreed with the PSOE have been rejected. Junts, with the support of the PNV, had tried to include among the amnestiable causes all those “attributed based on artificial and/or prospective police operations aimed at the criminalization of public positions and/or their environment (…)”. This amendment has only had three votes in favor, with all those from the PSOE and PP against.
Previously, the Justice Commission had rejected the request made by the PP for experts to appear who could “advise” in relation to the proposed amnesty law.
The popular deputy María Jesús Moro has defended the need for these appearances, indicating that this is “one of the most discussed laws, with the most problems, with the most opacity” and with “a self-drafting of those who benefited” from the amnesty.
After learning of the agreement, the general secretary of the PP, Cuca Gamarra, published a message on the social network “This illegal, unjust and immoral amnesty. 140 years of history to end up submitting to the fugitive. It is Sánchez’s payment for being in Moncloa.”
Podemos deputy Martina Velarde has considered that this is “an attempt to delay the amnesty law” by the PP, while her ERC colleague Pilar Vallugera has indicated that “there have already been enough public positions.”
