Llarena delays the archiving of the case against Puigdemont, but sees the amnesty as inevitable

MadridPablo Llarena assumes that the Supreme Court is bound to apply the amnesty to Carles Puigdemont, but resists facilitating it. It was expected that this week the investigating judge would conclude the summary proceedings and refer the case against the former President of the Generalitat and the former ministers Toni Comín and Lluís Puig to the trial court of the Procés so that Manuel Marchena could apply the total and definitive amnesty to the exiles – although he first still had to grant a five-day period for the parties to pronounce themselves again–. These are the two resolutions missing for the Supreme Court to put an end to the judicial persecution of Puigdemont. However, the investigator has slowed down the path and has limited himself to dismissing the appeal that Vox filed against the lifting of the arrest warrants that the Supreme Court issued after the Constitutional Court endorsed the amnesty in cases of embezzlement. Llarena thus delays the outcome: he takes one more step, but avoids taking the decisive step, which will have to come in the next few days.

“This pronouncement is limited to the lifting of the orders. It does not entail the conclusion of a summary proceeding pending certain appeals, nor does it replace a definitive resolution on the extinction of liability and the dismissal of the case,” the interlocutory order remarks. In the resolution, the investigator openly disagrees with the TC's ruling, but admits that he has “the obligation” to follow the doctrine established by the court of guarantees. On the other hand, as ARA has learned, the Supreme Court plans to lift this very Tuesday the disqualifications of the four former ministers convicted of embezzlement. In this way, Oriol Junqueras, Jordi Turull, Dolors Bassa and Raül Romeva will be able to run for elections again or hold public office.

What appeal does Pablo Llarena have pending? It is a motion for reconsideration filed by Carles Puigdemont and Toni Comín against the judge's refusal to apply the amnesty to them following theruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in July. It was on September 15 when the judge rejected their claims, but the two exiles appealed it before Llarena himself, and now the final step of responding to them remains. Right now, the magistrate is in Colombia on a work trip. Legal sources with knowledge of the matter explain to ARA that he has decided to resolve the issue regarding free movement because it was a priority and that he will not take long to take the final step. That said, it could arrive next week if he is not available before returning to Spain. Two years ago, it took him a month to resolve the appeals against his refusal to apply the amnesty to embezzlement.

On October 6, following the Constitutional Court's ruling on Dolors Bassa, Pablo Llarena left the arrest warrants without effect "provisionally" and with a "strictly transitory character". The next day, he gave the parties five days to state their position, a deadline that ended last Thursday. He has now issued the court order that dismisses Vox's complaints and confirms that the three exiles can return to Catalonia in freedom. He argues that the case of the former Minister of Labor, Social Affairs and Families is "substantially coincident" with those of the exiles and, therefore, the Constitutional Court's first verdict "prevents maintaining" the arrest warrants.

However, Puigdemont's total amnesty –when it arrives– will not lead to his immediate return. The former president's inner circle leans towards him not returning to Catalonia until after the November 29 elections. His lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, was clear last week: "He will not return in the middle of the electoral campaign, which is what the PSOE would want," he said. "Mission accomplished," the lawyer celebrated minutes after learning of Llarena's new resolution.

Reproaches to the Constitutional Court

Pablo Llarena takes advantage of the twelve-page interlocutory order to harshly criticize the Constitutional Court and reproach the progressive majority for considering that the Supreme Court's interpretation is not reasonable: “I do not consider that it lacked a sufficient legal basis to pass constitutional scrutiny,” he argues. “I disagree that our criteria fell outside the responses that the Constitution allows,” he adds. And he clings to the dissenting votes of the five conservative magistrates of the Constitutional Court to defend himself against the rebukes of the ruling: “That almost half of the Constitutional Court considered this interpretation constitutionally admissible advised a measure in the qualifiers that is not perceived in the bluntness of their censure”.

Likewise, he expresses his “disagreement” with the TC's pronouncement and insists that his reading of the embezzlement is “legally founded”. “The doctrine of the Constitutional Court must be applied, even if the reasons upon which it is based are not shared. [...] Recognizing who has the final say does not require sharing that the problem only admitted one answer,” he states.

The independence movement celebrates the decision

After the decision became known, the secretary general of Junts, Jordi Turull, boasted of a “resounding victory without qualification” and presented it as the “result of a political, legal, and democratic battle sustained for many years” and not as a “generous concession by the State.” The number two of ERC, Elisenda Alamany, lamented that the decision to delay the archiving of the case is the judge’s “last tantrum,” but celebrated that he has confirmed the lifting of the arrest warrants: “It is very good news that what ERC has fought for for a long time, sometimes alone, is bearing fruit,” she stated.

For its part, the CUP has called for “getting out of the amnesty labyrinth” to “start working to prepare the next onslaught against the Spanish state.” And Òmnium Cultural summarized on X that “nine years of shameful persecution are ending” and pressured the Supreme Court to close the case: “There is no time for more excuses, it is time to close the repressive cycle.”