The president of the Constitutional [Court] defends the amnesty for the leaders of the Procés: "It is common sense"

MadridThe president of the Constitutional Court, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, fundamentally amends the Supreme Court's refusal to apply the amnesty to embezzlement and considers that doing so is "the only thing reconcilable" with the "rules of logic and common sense" and with an "interpretation of the law that attends to its spirit and purpose, as well as to its own genesis." This is stated in his report, to which ARA has had access, regarding the appeal for constitutional protection (recurs d'empara) by Dolors Bassa, who was Minister of Labor, Social Affairs and Families during the October 1 referendum and is disqualified until 2031. He argues that the Supreme Court's interpretation was "extensive," "contrary to the spirit and purpose" of the law, and "internally contradictory" in relation to the application of the exclusions.

The conclusion is clear: the Constitutional Court will order the Supreme Court to backtrack and issue a "new resolution" in which it "declares amnestied" the crime of embezzlement because it "did not appreciate the concurrence of any other reason" that would prevent it. Likewise, it reminds the court that doing so has a "preferential and urgent character." This will open the door for the return of Carles Puigdemont to Catalonia, given that Pablo Llarena has opened up to lifting the arrest warrant once the TC has issued its first verdict.

The text will be debated and approved at the plenary session on Tuesday, October 8, together with the new report prepared by the conservative José María Macías regarding the appeal for constitutional protection by Jordi Turull. He had to redo it after his first version, in which he agreed with the Supreme Court and endorsed leaving the leaders of the Procés outside the perimeter of the amnesty, was left in the minority.

Macías speaks of a “sense unequivocally different” from the legislator's will

Four days ago, José María Macías modified his initial proposal regarding Jordi Turull's appeal for protection (recurs d'empara) in accordance with the majority position of the plenary, which has a progressive leaning. The new report, to which ARA had access, considered that the interpretation of embezzlement made by Pablo Llarena “cannot be considered correctly motivated and founded in Law” and concluded that the current secretary general of Junts had his rights to effective judicial protection, political representation and participation, and penal legality violated.

The draft argues that the amnesty had been interpreted in an “unequivocally different sense” to the will of the legislator and considers that the investigating judge “departed” from the purpose of the rule: “Incurring in a logical failure, consisting of applying a precept with a manifest lack of harmony with what the rule itself intends. That is to say, making the rule say what it does not say, nor did it expressly intend to say”.