The current legal situation
The accusations of terrorism in the Tsunami case have been filed in the National Court, but not in the Supreme Court, where the judge Susana Polo has not yet pronounced on the charge that yesterday dedicated the penal room to the judge Manuel García – Castellón This has generated a debate about the issue of amnesty in this case.
Opposing positions
The popular accusations, represented by unionist entities, have asked the preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) arguing that the crime of terrorism cannot be amnestied according to the law of the Union. Instead, the defenses of Carles Puigdemont and deputy Ruben Wagensberg, tried by the Supreme Court, as well as the Prosecutor’s Office and the State Bar, have asked that the amnesty be applied. This divergence of positions has generated an intense debate on the interpretation of the law in this particular case.
The response of the defense of Carles Puigdemont
The defense of Carles Puigdemont, led by Gonzalo Boye, has responded to the position requested by the judge, attributing the questions that are being raised to ignorance of Union law. Boye assures that there is no doubt about the application of the amnesty in this case and he is not opposed to raising the prejudicial questions to the CJEU, although he considers that there is no legal basis to do so.
The jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union
Puigdemont’s defense has advanced the jurisprudence of the CJEU in which it is made clear that the authorities of a member state cannot directly invoke a directive to aggravate the criminal liability of the accused in legal proceedings. This has generated a debate on the interpretation of European jurisprudence in relation to this specific case.