Inici » The President in Exile and the Judicial Controversy: Carles Puigdemont and the Compromising Audios

The President in Exile and the Judicial Controversy: Carles Puigdemont and the Compromising Audios

by PREMIUM.CAT
un home amb vestit i corbata parla per un micròfon davant d'una paret de fusta amb un panell de fusta darrere, Carles Delclaux Is, ignacio fernandez rios, un retrat, plasticien

The Forceful Position of Carles Puigdemont

The president in exile, Carles Puigdemont, has firmly expressed his position after learning of the compromising audio recordings of Judge Joaquín Aguirre. In a message published on X, the former Twitter account, Puigdemont has stated that when judges use their position to influence politics and undermine the rule of law, this has legal implications that are contemplated in the Penal Code. Puigdemont makes specific reference to prevarication, making clear his position regarding the judicial situation that involves him.

Legal Action Announced

Carles Puigdemont’s lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, recently announced the filing of a complaint against the judge in the Volhov case for prevarication. This legal action arises following the opening of a separate piece in which Puigdemont, Mas, Alay, Artadi and other people are accused of treason and embezzlement.

The Audios of Judge Aguirre

The compromising audios of Judge Aguirre, in which he is heard speaking with other people in judicial offices about the investigation of the Volhov case, have been revealing. These recordings, broadcast by Canal Red, directed by the former vice president of the Government Pablo Iglesias, show a political bias on the part of the judge. In the audios, Aguirre comments on the amnesty law and its impact on Pedro Sánchez’s government, as well as his influence on the rejection of the first ruling of said law.

Political Repercussions

The recordings reveal that Judge Aguirre considers that the amnesty law will be detrimental to Pedro Sánchez’s government, and he attributes the failure of the text that was not approved in the plenary session of Congress. These comments have generated a debate about the judge’s impartiality and his influence on relevant political decisions.

You may also like

-
00:00
00:00
Update Required Flash plugin
-
00:00
00:00