Constitutional decision on allegations of Puigdemont in investiture



Agencies | Drafting

The candidate for the presidency of the Generalitat for Junts per Catalunya had presented said allegations for the obligation to appear before the Parliament for the investiture.

The constitutional Court he has rejected the allegations that Carles Puigdemont and the elected deputies of Junts per Catalunya (JxCat) made this Monday afternoon against the prohibition of his candidacy for the Generalitat without appearing before the Parliament, issued on Saturday by this court.

The Plenary of the Constitutional Court has met at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday to resolve these allegations and after an hour and a half of meeting it has issued a ruling contrary to them.

The precautionary measures, which are therefore still in force, go through prohibiting a possible telematic or delegation investiture and the requirement that the candidate have judicial authorization to go to the Chamber.

The deliberation of the magistrates of the TC began just a few hours after the president of the Parliament, Roger Torrent, announced the suspension of the investiture session pending the next steps of the court of guarantees. The eleven magistrates present today in plenary session – the conservative AndrĂ©s Oller has been absent again, on leave for health reasons – have adopted this decision unanimously after just an hour and a half of meeting.

It so happens that, despite having been summoned as a party, the Parliament of Catalonia has not presented allegations while the State Bar has done so.

It argues that there is no defenselessness and there is no violation of procedural rules that could lead to the annulment of the requirements set for the investiture. The Government also defends that the TC has the possibility of adopting precautionary measures before admitting a challenge, as it did on Saturday.

See also  Sophie Wessex hits the dancefloor with incredible moves alongside TV's Judge Rinder

The principle of parliamentary autonomy is not violated

In this way, the magistrates confirm in its entirety the order issued last Saturday and reject that the precautionary measures agreed then violate the principle of parliamentary autonomy; or that make the elected deputies of JxCat defenseless, whose right of defense they consider to be duly preserved by accepting their appearance in the procedure.

The Plenary Assembly affirms that it must respect the power that article 161.2 of the Constitution attributes to the Government to obtain the suspension of the resolutions and provisions of the Autonomous Communities that it appeals; and, on the other hand, recalls the duty of all public powers, including parliamentary chambers, to comply with the pronouncements of the Court.

“Contrary to what is adduced – reason the magistrates -, this pronouncement – in reference to the decision of Saturday – does not entail the declaration of nullity of any act and has no more scope than to warn that the violation of the suspension agreed in that resolution would entail the nullity of full right of the act or way of fact that does not respect the referred measures “.

Respect for the prerogative of the Government

Faced with the allegation that the TC lacks powers to “preventively interpret the Regulations of the Parliament of Catalonia”, the magistrates deny having made such preventive interpretation and insists that it has limited itself to verifying that it has the power to suspend acts before agreeing to their admission to process – there are precedents in the jurisprudence – and it insists that it has proceeded with respect to the prerogative of the Government to urge said suspension.

See also  Triple murderer could have increased sentence after review

His action, concludes the TC responds to the “forced submission to the Constitution of all public powers” and therefore warn Torrent of the consequences of disobeying him “are not contrary to the autonomy of the Chamber” nor do they imply usurpation of functions, nor they can be branded as contrary to the separation of powers.

Puigdemont had also argued that the right to vote cannot be restricted without a final conviction, to which the Constitutional Court replies that the possible effects that precautionary measures have on said right “in no case can be attributed to this court, precisely , for being a due process act “.

Related Posts

George Holan

George Holan is chief editor at Plainsmen Post and has articles published in many notable publications in the last decade.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.