Yes to the presentation report, no to the law. That is the formula chosen by Junts per Catalunya so that the work done with the Amnesty law until now in the Congress of Deputies is not lost and, at the same time, gain time to continue negotiating with the PSOE and try to incorporate the drafted their aspirations from the norm. A path that they see traveled despite the message from Félix Bolaños after the plenary session.
In JxCat they had assured in recent hours that they were willing to overturn the law if, in their opinion, it was not robust enough. At the same time, they added that their intention was to negotiate until the end so that there was an agreement or for the PSOE to move from its initial position of not accepting the amendments they proposed, especially after the statements of the socialist spokesperson on Monday, Esther Peña. , or from the third vice president of the Government, Teresa Ribera, from a few days ago. All of this was reminiscent of what happened in the plenary session two weeks ago with the first Moncloa decrees, but this time the outcome has been different.
The threat has been consummated after the amendments that were still alive have been knocked down in the previous debate.
The justification put forward by the post-convergents is that, with the movements of magistrate Manuel García Castellón in the National Court and of judge Joaquín Aguirre in the investigating court number 1 of Barcelona, ??with the current wording, leaders of the process and some activists, such as members of the Committees for the Defense of the Republic (CDR) who are awaiting trial. “The adaptation of the judicial agenda to the political agenda is so blatant that there is no need for arguments,” JxCat spokesperson in Madrid, Miriam Nogueras, pointed out from the lectern.
Sources from the formation of Carles Puigdemont – the former president has valued in a long message on the social network Twitter “the efforts of PSOE and Sumar” in “a hostile context” and has put the focus on the judges – detail that they do not want it to happen With the amnesty what happened with the reform of the crime of embezzlement, which for the leaders of 1-O has not had the expected effects after the interpretation of the magistrates. These sources also point out that they are willing to run the risk of European justice overturning some points of the law if their proposals to modify it are accepted. “They do not accept amendments because they are afraid of what European justice will do,” stated Nogueras. “We take full responsibility,” he added right after.
The intention of the post-convergents was for at least two amendments to be accepted, one that they presented to extend the term of the amnesty until November 2011 and, above all, another that they agreed with the PNV with which, according to their criteria, it would occur. coverage for all pro-independence supporters who now believe they may be left out, both those prosecuted for terrorism and those investigated for the alleged Russian plot of the process. “By excluding the terms of terrorism and treason, what we do is not embarrass Europeans by trivializing terrorism, as prevaricating judges do,” Nogueras highlighted.
Previously, the leader had reiterated the party’s position, with a last attempt to bring closer positions with the PSOE – “we will exhaust every last option,” she said – and the warning that they could not accept the rule as it was written. “Stopping repression halfway is not stopping it,” she stressed. “We cannot participate in leaving the Catalan independence movement exposed to the arbitrariness of the politicized Spanish judicial leadership,” added the leader, who has supported her argument in the judicial action of recent days.
For Junts, “the text is a good starting point and would be even more so in a full democracy without interference.” “But the law has holes where the prevaricating Spanish justice system can leave the amnesty on empty paper,” added JxCat, who ended up raising the tone by telling the PSOE that “they are not prepared to break with the Franco regime” and asking them Let them fight the judges. “A Francoism that you know is installed in many State institutions and that depends on your will to eradicate them, today they are going for us and tomorrow they will go for you,” she pointed out.
