Oriol Junqueras asked the Supreme their immediate release and that will nullify the judgment of ‘procés’

Oriol Junqueras has called this Tuesday to the Supreme Court to order his "immediate release" to go to the European Parliament so he can get his act mp and, i

Oriol Junqueras asked the Supreme their immediate release and that will nullify the judgment of ‘procés’

Oriol Junqueras has called this Tuesday to the Supreme Court to order his "immediate release" to go to the European Parliament so he can get his act mp and, in parallel, to declare the nullity of the judgment of the procés that the past October 14, sentenced him to 13 years in prison. So it is in the writing of 15 sheets with which the lawyer Andreu Van den Eynde, defender of the leader of ERC, has answered to the summons of the Supreme, to know his position in regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the immunity of meps.

The writing of Junqueras has been submitted after that formalized the office of the Prosecutor advocating for the maintenance of the judgment of the Supreme and the permanence of the exvicepresident of the government in prison; when the Law of the State continues to debate over their writing and while they are the contacts between the Government and CKD in order to unlock the endowment. Holds Junqueras after the decision of the european court has been clear that “there is (...) any other title enabling of the condition of member of the european parliament that the proclamation of his election, or the exercise of the parliamentary functions can be conditioned by the domestic law to the enforcement of any requirement upon his proclamation as elected representative”.


The Government delayed the writing of the Law of the State in the face of pressure from CKD, the office of The Prosecutor, on Junqueras: “The immunity cannot become a refuge generator of impunity,” The PP asks the Board of Elections to be disabled already to Junqueras to stop being mep

therefore, says the lawyer, “enjoys immunity (...) a person who, like Mr Junqueras Vies, it has been officially proclaimed elected to the European Parliament when it was in the situation of pretrial detention in a criminal prosecution, for serious offences, but that has not been authorized to meet certain requirements provided by the domestic Law after the proclamation or scroll to the European Parliament to participate in its first session”.

in the judgment of Junqueras, which came from hence when it was elected was the lifting of the measure of provisional detention “in order to allow the interested party to move to the European Parliament”. The paper argues that the Supreme should ask the suplicatorio, “but do so after the lifting of the precautionary measure of prison”, as “Mr. Junqueras acquired all the rights and immunities enjoyed by the members of the european parliament and his seat may not remain vacant”, so that “the restrictions” adopted by the Supreme court “should cease”.

the ruling by The court of Luxembourg –adds the writing - leads to “the need” to recognize that Junqueras “had the right to leave the prison and travel to the European Parliament, in accordance with the legal interpretation” that brings that judgment. From all this it follows that Junqueras should now have the “possibility to scroll (...) to the headquarters of the European Parliament if they would like complied with the terms and purposes of the decision of the CJEU”.

later, the paper addresses the effects of the decision european on the trial of the procés, and concludes that “there is no legal solution that respects the content and orientation of the ECJ judgement which does not involve the nullity of the resolution of condemnation” of Junqueras. Do not override the judgment of the Supreme “would be to force the interpretation of the Spanish against the defendant and to disregard the law of the Union”.

“Since it was exclusive to the European Parliament", he adds, "to decide on the lifting” of the immunity of Junqueras “prior to the dictation of the judgment of 14 October, this should lead to the declaration of nullity of the final decision out of respect for the institution of citizen representation”, the european Chamber.

for the avoidance of doubt, the notice stresses that “the ECJ leaves no margin of doubt: the answer of this honorable Chamber must ensure that the votes granted to the candidacy of mr. Junqueras are reflected in the composition of the European Parliament and that the institution is not affected by the decision of the national court”. To which is added the reasoning of “can't the judicial power to affect the will of the people expressed in the ballot box and, on the contrary, he has the obligation of collaborating with the european institutions in the protection of the privileges and immunities of the parliamentarians, thus avoiding the production of irreparable consequences afectantes to fundamental rights and principles of democratic societies, assumed by the EU”.

As a conclusion, the defense of Junqueras believes that the Supreme “must agree” that “Junqueras enjoyed immunity” from the past June 13, at the launch of the results of the european elections. And declare that they were violated their rights to freedom, to political representation and to a fair trial, so that should now be “to ensure the free movement” of Junqueras ' to the European Parliament under the privilege of immunity (...), leading to his immediate release”.

on the other hand, it is appropriate –it adds to the writing, declare that –given the unique ability of the European Parliament to authorize the prosecution of any criminal proceedings against their members, “the processing of the special-cause” of the procés “should be suspended from the 13th day of June, 2019, and, in consequence, decreed the nullity of the judgment of 14 October 2019”, pondering the request already made by the defence of the leader of ERC in the proceedings underway in the Supreme court about the incident of nullity.

This procedure is necessary in order to go after the Constitutional Court on habeas corpus when it appears that in a criminal proceeding is alleged to have violated fundamental rights. The defenses have already filed their respective briefs on this issue, and the Supreme court planned to resolve the matter early next year.

Updated Date: 25 December 2019, 20:02



You need to login to comment.

Please register or login.