The content of the recording
Judge Joaquín Aguirre, known for his involvement in the Volhov case and the Russian plot surrounding the Process, has generated controversy with a recording published by the newspaper Diario Red. In this recording, the judge exhibits a sullen tone as he talks about the amnesty and his maneuvers, which were initially rejected. Specifically, the judge refers to his own actions surrounding the Russian Plot of the Process, which influenced the initial rejection of the amnesty by the government. This ensured that Carles Puigdemont could be included despite Aguirre’s efforts to prevent it.
Reactions to the recording
Carles Puigdemont, one of the main people affected by Judge Aguirre’s actions, has reacted to this publication. He has stated that when judges make politics from their position and use it to subvert the rule of law, this has a name and is in the Penal Code. This reaction highlights the seriousness of the accusations and the tension surrounding this situation.
Legal implications and political reactions
Aguirre has been implicated in the cause of the Russian plot in the Trial for the past four years. Although the case was dormant for a while due to a lack of evidence, the judge reactivated it to prevent Carles Puigdemont, Gonzalo Boye or Josep Lluís Alay from taking advantage of the amnesty law. This has generated great controversy and has ended with the imputation of a crime of high treason against these individuals. This situation has caused political tensions and has generated a clear division in relation to the interpretation of the judge’s actions.
Revelations on the recording
The recording, made in January of this year, shows how Aguirre celebrates the fact that he was the one who influenced the rejection of the amnesty with his maneuvers. In addition, he predicts little future for the Spanish government and refers to an interview he gave to German public television to spread his unfounded suspicions about the Russian plot in the Process. These revelations have generated great controversy and have called into question the impartiality of the judge in this matter.
