The majority of the Constitutional Court endorses the total amnesty for the leaders of the Procés and brings closer the return of Puigdemont

MadridThe Constitutional Court has activated the countdown for Carles Puigdemont's return to Catalonia. It has done so by endorsing the application of the amnesty law to the embezzlement attributed to the Procés, as ARA has learned. As expected, the progressive majority imposed its criteria and rejected the proposal of the conservative José María Macías, who was in favor of rejecting the appeal for protection (recurs d'empara) by Jordi Turull –Minister of the Presidency during the 1-O and current secretary general of Junts– and validating the criteria of the Supreme Court, which until now has refused to exonerate the crime of embezzlement. After an hour and a half of deliberation, he was left in the minority.

And now what? The next step will be Tuesday, October 6, at the next plenary session, when José María Macías himself will propose a motion that is in accordance with the majority verdict and, at the same time, will present a dissenting opinion defending his thesis. However, in parallel, the president of the Constitutional Court, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, will put his proposal on the table regarding Dolors Bassa's appeal for protection (recurs d'empara). It is a text he has been working on for some time and which he intends to have the most complete argumentation possible: it must be taken into account that the most important thing about the ruling will be its wording, since it will have to be applicable to all the leaders of the 'Procés'. And the fact is that the first resolution will have effects on the rest and will have to serve, for example, so that Pablo Llarena lifts the arrest warrant for Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Lluís Puig.

Informed sources argue to ARA that it is not the same to draft a ruling from scratch, with its own structure and internal logic, as it is to retouch a previously prepared text. It is not a matter of inserting sentences – in the jargon of the Constitutional Court, it would be adding “some bold text” – but rather about giving it a cohesive consistency. Starting from the text prepared by Cándido Conde-Pumpido will make the arguments of the progressive majority “much better understood”. However, it is an unprecedented circumstance in the Constitutional Court, of which there are no known precedents. The same voices relate that the debate within the Constitutional Court this Tuesday was “relaxed” and “very fluid”, and assure that it was not a tense discussion. Another voice present at the debate points out that everyone limited themselves to stating their position without there having been an exchange of opinions.

In June of last year, the Constitutional Court already rejected the unconstitutionality appeal presented by the PP and concluded that the amnesty law fits with the Magna Carta. However, it has not yet specifically ruled on the interpretation of the embezzlement (malversació) made by the Supreme Court to avoid applying the amnesty to the leaders of the 'Procés', in which it argued that Puigdemont, Junqueras and some ministers of the October 1st referendum obtained a personal benefit from the referendum because they saved themselves from paying for it out of their own pockets.

What will Pablo Llarena do?

Just a few days ago, sources familiar with the Supreme Court pointed out that after the Constitutional Court's first ruling, Pablo Llarena could lift the arrest warrant that has been weighing on Carles Puigdemont for almost nine years. The initial pronouncement will need to contain “constitutional expressions that have repercussions and relevance” in the case of the Junts leader and which, therefore, are “extrapolable” to his situation. Two weeks later, the same voices predict that the first ruling will have a “permeability” that will allow for this connection.

Once the ruling is published, Pablo Llarena's circle does not rule out that he may act ex officio to apply the amnesty, although he could grant a five-day period to the parties – the Public Prosecutor's Office, the State Attorney's Office, the lawyers for the leaders of the 'Procés' and Vox as popular prosecution – to state their position. Likewise, he would have to formally put an end to the summary proceedings and refer the case to the court that judged the 'Procés' so that it could certify its definitive archiving. It would be then that Carles Puigdemont would be completely freed from criminal responsibilities.

The discarded draft

The report by José María Macías that the progressive majority rejected maintained that the interpretation made by the Supreme Court was not “surprising or unpredictable” and could not be classified as “capricious or the result of alleged animosity”. “The benefit can also be specified in the mere possibility of improperly disposing of funds not previously available, [...] being able to dispose of what was not available already implies a benefit”, argued the text, to which ARA had access. It maintained that the October 1st councilors “relieved themselves” of a “personal expense” because “they did not have to pay for the financing of the secessionist process out of their own pockets”. An interpretation that, as has been demonstrated this Tuesday, does not have the endorsement of a majority of the Constitutional Court.

Turull and Junqueres pressure the Supreme Court

After the news became known, Jordi Turull asserted that the Constitutional Court's endorsement of the amnesty represents an "absolute disavowal" of "all those judges who have preferred to engage in political activism instead of fulfilling their duty to apply" the law. The secretary general of Junts lamented that the decision "has arrived very late" and made it clear that, although it is an "important step," "many more remain to be taken" after encountering the "politicization" of "a large part of the judiciary." In this way, he stressed that the application of the amnesty cannot be considered closed until Puigdemont, Comín, and Puig are seen "walking through the streets of the Principality".

Besides the exiles, the Constitutional Court's decision –pending the Supreme Court's move– would also allow for the lifting of Oriol Junqueras's disqualification. "October 6 must mark the beginning for the exiles to return home and for our political rights to be restored," stated the ERC leader in a post on X. Furthermore, in a statement, the republicans have demanded the "immediate application" of the amnesty law to all cases still open following the 1-O.