There are two extensions and it is foreseeable that more will be claimed. First in September and then in October, the State asked the European Court of Human Rights for adjournments to respond to the list of questions posed to it by the Strasbourg-based body, after admitting to processing the appeals of two of those convicted of the process against the Supreme Court ruling imposing sentences of up to 13 years in prison. The new deadline is met on November 6 and legal sources consulted predict that more time will be requested again..
Strasbourg's move puts the Government in a bind: it will now have to indicate whether it supports the interpretation made by the high court of the facts linked to the 1-O referendum and its conviction for sedition and embezzlement. This happens in full conversations with Junts and ERC ahead of the investiture of Pedro Sánchez. The worst time to make assessments that may go down badly with the pro-independence parties, but also to position oneself on their side and in front of the Supreme Court. Strasbourg investigates, specifically, the position of Spain – represented by the State Attorney's Office – regarding the allegations of those affected who claim that they were subjected to violations of their fundamental rights..
The deadline given to the State refers on this occasion to the resources of Jordi Turull and Jordi Sànchez, in the lawsuit they presented, through the lawyer Jordi Pina, in June 2020.. As El Nacional recalled, the State Attorney's Office has been arguing that in order to assess the facts, it requires that the courts involved provide “supporting evidence” that it does not yet have.. In addition, he referred to the complexity of the case and the need to complete a series of “internal searches”, still in process..
This same week, the State has also requested the extension of its conclusions in a third case, that of the former vice president of the Parliamentary Committee, Josep Costa, who also appealed to the court specialized in rights.. In its case, the extension of the step will be extended until November 30, so the red line of the investiture of Jordi Sánchez is saved..
The melon
The biggest melon is the one that the Government faces in the face of the last of the appeals, admitted by the ECtHR, which affects all the nine politicians condemned by the Supreme Court.. In this case, Strasbourg sent a list of issues to clarify. As reflected in the Strasbourg resolution, to which El Confidencial has had access, the court wants to know, specifically, what the State's opinion is on the version of the convicted persons, who have alleged that they saw a violation of Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which establishes that “no one may be condemned for an action or omission that, at the time it was committed, does not constitute an infraction according to national or international law” and that contemplates that “a penalty may not be imposed” more serious than that applicable at the time the infringement was committed.”.
The court requires answers to several questions. Among them, it asks whether the Kingdom of Spain believes that the TS made an “unforeseeable or expansive interpretation of the crime of sedition and/or embezzlement of funds contrary to article 7 of the European Convention on human rights.”. He also wants to know Spain's opinion on other statements by the independence leaders.. They also alleged that their right to freedom of expression and assembly was violated because they limited themselves to encouraging the population “to participate in demonstrations in defense of the independence process and to participate in a referendum on the independence of Catalonia.”. “Have the applicants been convicted for a legitimate exercise of their rights to freedom of association and expression, in violation of Article 10 and/or Article 11 of the Convention?” Strasbourg asks.
Others of those convicted also complained that their imprisonment was disproportionate, that the process to which they were subjected was not equitable and that their political rights were violated.. For this reason, the ECtHR asks if the Spanish State shares this vision and its right to freedom and security was violated or it was not done and they demand clarifications on the other points..
Last February the Supreme Court reviewed the sentences of the nine convicted as a result of the penal reform that eliminated the crime of sedition and modified that of embezzlement.. This review was limited to disqualification sentences because prison sentences were pardoned by the Government in 2021.. In the case of Junqueras, the TS agreed to maintain the sentence of 13 years of disqualification, which means that he will not be able to aspire to any public office until 2031, by changing the crime of sedition to that of disobedience and maintaining the crime of embezzlement..
For Romeva, Turull and Bassa, it was considered pertinent to maintain the disqualification penalties for disobedience and embezzlement, ruling out a reduction in sentences by maintaining this last crime in its aggravated modality, with which they will remain disqualified until 2030.. For its part, the court convicted Sànchez and Cuixart for public disorder and Forcadell, Rull and Forn for disobedience.. In their cases, this change in crimes meant the total extinction of their respective disqualification sentences..