The lawyer for those convicted of 1-O criticizes the judicial decision and defends Wagensberg’s work from Switzerland
Andreu Van den Eynde, the lawyer who represents Oriol Junqueras, Ruben Wagensberg and other ERC leaders convicted by the October 1 referendum, has expressed his rejection of the Supreme Court’s decision to open a criminal case against Carles Puigdemont and the deputy of ERC Ruben Wagensberg for an alleged crime of terrorism in relation to the Democratic Tsunami. Van den Eynde has stated that he is not surprised by the Supreme Court’s action, “the impression was that anything was possible, it is not that surprising either.” In an interview this Friday in El Món to RAC1, Wagensberg’s lawyer spoke, who on January 31 announced that he was moving to live in Switzerland to protect himself from persecution by the Spanish justice system due to the Democratic Tsunami. Regarding this fact, Van den Eynde has argued that the Republican was clear that the work he had to do “had to be transferred to another jurisdiction.” So, he recalled that what he has been doing since he left is “working so that everyone knows what is happening.”
Wagensberg could be arrested if he testifies before the Supreme Court
Regarding the possibility that the Supreme Court summons Wagensberg to testify and that he accepts, the lawyer has acknowledged that there would be the possibility of him being arrested. “Nowadays, being an independentist means risking being arrested.” Van den Eynde has denounced that currently “being pro-independence is a crime”, and, therefore, it is a risk that the deputy could run. However, he has stated that “I have the habit of not supplanting the responsibilities that people have over his life, I don’t know what Ruben wants to do.”
The Supreme Court plays politics by investigating Puigdemont and Wagensberg for terrorism
Lawyer Andreu Van den Eynde has stated that what the Supreme Court is doing by agreeing to investigate Puigdemont and Wagensberg for terrorism “is politics.” In this sense, he has defended that his job is to try to “denounce it and make it understood internationally.” However, he has lamented that there is a structural bias in the judicial system that “has understood that it can usurp the legislative power and that it can create law, instead of applying it.” In this sense, he has denounced that “they are destroying the rule of law.” Van den Eynde has assured that the Supreme Court’s decision responds to an attempt to “dynamite” the amnesty law “because they don’t like it.” According to the lawyer, among those opposed to the amnesty an imaginary is being built that amnesties “should not exist, at least for these reasons. They are building terrorism.”
The criminal chamber of the Supreme Court declares itself competent to try Puigdemont and Wagensberg for terrorism
The criminal chamber of the Supreme Court has unanimously agreed to declare its jurisdiction and open a criminal case against Carles Puigdemont and the fourth secretary of the Parliament Bureau, Ruben Wagensberg, for a crime of terrorism in the Democratic Tsunami case. The judge of the National Court, Manuel García-Castellón, had sent a reasoned statement for the Supreme Court to take up the case, since both Puigdemont and Wagensberg are certified. The Supreme Court Prosecutor’s Office, however, had ended up speaking out against it. Finally, the Supreme Court has appointed Judge Susana Polo as investigator and rejects the jurisdiction to investigate the case against the rest of those investigated who, unlike Puigdemont and Wagensberg, do not have capacity as deputies.
Puigdemont and Wagensberg will be called to testify as investigated
The magistrates consider “necessary and pertinent” that Puigdemont and Wagensberg “be called to the procedure to be heard as investigated with all the rights and guarantees provided for in the legal system”, an investigative procedure that cannot be carried out by the instructor, in reference to García -Castellón, but the second room of the Supreme Court, since they are seated.