The Constitutional Court will reject lifting the arrest warrant against Puigdemont today.

MadridThe Constitutional Court (CC) will reject this Tuesday Carles Puigdemont's request for the urgent lifting of the arrest warrant against him in Spanish territory. Sources consulted by ARA indicate that the full court will admit the former Catalan president's appeal for protection, but will oppose the precautionary measures he requested: forcing Supreme Court Judge Pablo Llarena to allow the Junts leader's return without even hearing the opinion of the courts. What the CC will do is open a file on the matter and ask the parties involved whether the arrest warrant should be withdrawn before ruling on the merits of the case, which is whether the amnesty law applies to the embezzlement case against Puigdemont.

The decision taken by the plenary session this Tuesday is the one that was expected a month ago, although Puigdemont's own defense delayed it when he submitted a document requesting the recusal of three magistrates from the conservative sector: Concepción Espejel, José María Macías and Enrique Arnaldo. Two weeks ago the TC unanimously dismissed the recusals, something that was already known would happen, so there was a certain amount of discussion within the body. feeling of bewilderment over the movement of lawyer Gonzalo Boye, which only had the effect of delaying the resolution of the case.

Unlike the appeals for protection of constitutional rights filed by those already convicted in the 1-O referendum – Oriol Junqueras, Raül Romeva, Jordi Turull and Dolors Bassa – which were admitted for processing unanimously, judges Arnaldo and Espejel are expected to issue a dissenting opinion on Tuesday. They consider the appeal for protection of constitutional rights filed by Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Lluís Puig to be premature because their case is still in the investigation phase, although the majority of the plenary does not consider this to be the case: the Supreme Court's decision not to grant him the amnesty no longer has any further internal recourse within the Supreme Court and, therefore, the path is open to go to the Constitutional Court. In any case, this discrepancy will lead to a vote on Tuesday on whether to admit the case and reject the injunctions requested by Puigdemont. However, the decision must be formalized with an order and not with a ruling—as initially planned—which could take a few days to draft.

Also on the agenda for the Constitutional Court's plenary session is the resolution of the question of unconstitutionality that the Supreme Court raised against the amnesty for an activist accused of causing public disorder for protests in Girona against the ruling in the October 1 trial. This is the first response that the judicial body will give to the Spanish high court regarding this law, although it will basically apply the doctrine it already established when it ruled on the PP's appeal in June. This issue will be addressed between Wednesday and Thursday, as it is the penultimate item on the agenda. The last is another appeal of unconstitutionality, the one filed by the Parliament of Aragon against the law. Along the same lines, the case will be dismissed following the criteria already decided, although it will be necessary to resolve some specificities that arise.

The embezzlement

For example, the Aragon Parliament argues that the section of the law that provides for amnesty for embezzlement, provided there is no enrichment, is unconstitutional, arguing that it goes against the interests of the European Union and Spain's commitments to European funds. Constitutional Court sources consulted by ARA already warn from the outset that the link between the two is not fully understood, but they already advance that this argument will be rejected. The mention of the crime of embezzlement should not be interpreted as a clue as to the decision that may be taken in the appeals for protection of the leaders of the 1-O referendum—they are convicted or prosecuted for that crime—because this will be an abstract response to what the Aragon Parliament is proposing, but not to the application of the law.