The Supreme Court has refused to release seven accused of process once has finished the trial “given the need to safeguard the purposes of the criminal process,” which is now entering the phases of deliberations by the magistrates awaiting a final judgment.
In a car, the court of the process indicates that it is this need to guarantee the process that “confers constitutional legitimacy to the restriction of liberty” of the accused at a time when neither the risk of flight nor the other assumptions that make this measure necessary have been “eliminated” .
The resolution affects seven of the nine defendants in preventive detention, given that neither Oriol Junqueras nor Raül Romeva they applied to the court.
On the other hand, the Supreme Court has sent an official letter to Penitentiary Institutions in which it gives its approval to the transfer of the nine prisoners preventive process to prisons in Catalonia as there is no “obstacle” or pending proceedings that “require the personal intervention” of the pro-independence leaders.
It has been the own president of the court of the procés, Manuel Marchena, who has directed this letter to the general secretary of Penitentiary Institutions, dependent on the Ministry of the Interior, competent in this matter.
UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
The order made public this Friday answers the allegations of the defendants Jordi Cuixart and Jordi Sánchez insofar as they supported their request for freedom relying on a Opinion of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
The magistrates emphasize that the opinion does not have binding value, contrary to what is maintained by the defenses, and that it does not refer to the assumptions that make the precautionary measure of imprisonment essential, but rather makes an assessment of the elements of the criminal types object of accusation “behind the back” of the evidentiary activity developed during four months in the Supreme Court.
The magistrates specify, in the face of what is upheld by the defenses, that neither the Strasbourg court has recognized the binding nature of the opinions of this UN working group.
On the merits of what was stated in the report, the Supreme Court notes that “it forgets that the referendum held on October 1, 2017 had been expressly prohibited by the constitutional Court and by resolution of Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia“And it also contains unacceptable evaluations of evidence about the occurrence of violence as a typical element of the main crime for which the accusation has been made, including” a blind evaluation of evidentiary elements whose true reality has not been appreciated by the report’s writers. “.
Add that “The opinion does not lack extravagant statements, devoid of all logic and impossible to fit into our procedural system”.
On the other hand, the Chamber flatly rejects the idea that the criminal charges in this case are intended to coerce the defendants for their political choices regarding the independence of Catalonia.
George Holan is chief editor at Plainsmen Post and has articles published in many notable publications in the last decade.