Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union Dean Spellman On Thursday, he will rule on the first two questions put to the European justice system by the Court of Accounts and the National Court in relation to the amnesty law.
Conclusions of the Advocate General Not bindingBut they are guiding the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in drafting the ruling, for which there is no date yet for issuance.
The future ruling of the Community Court will be conditional on the application of the Amnesty Law by the above-mentioned Spanish courts.
Specifically, the lawyer will rule on whether the expenses of the operation endanger the financial interests of the European Union and whether it was forgotten Terrorist crimes What the law envisages conflicts with the European Anti-Terrorism Directive.
In the first case, The Court of Accounts analyzes the accounting responsibilities of 35 former senior state officialsAmong them are former presidents Carles Puigdemont and Artur Mas, a case that remained paralyzed until the European Court of Justice’s ruling.
This is also the matter decided by the National Court against twelve members of the Committees for the Defense of the Republic accused of terrorism.
Last July, during the hearings held at the headquarters of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, The European Commission said there was “no sufficient direct harm.” Between the process and the Union’s financial interests, because in the hypothetical case that Catalonia became independent, Spain’s contribution to the Union budget would still be proportional to the Gross National Product (GNP).
But the lawyer for the group’s executive director, the Spanish Carlos Urraca, indicated that if the European justice system reaches the conclusion that there is a direct connection, it will be necessary to evaluate the extent to which the amnesty law serves the public interest.
In his argument he considered that the Spanish standard did not appear to respond to an objective of public interest, because it was “Part of a political agreement to achieve the installation of the government of Spain.”
It is an argument that was refuted by the State Prosecutor, Andrea Gavela, when he stated that the Spanish Constitutional Court approved the amnesty law considering that it “responds to a legitimate, explicit and reasonable purpose” to improve the political and social situation in Catalonia, thus taking into account the public interest.
Regarding the second issue, Brussels confirmed that the European directive on combating terrorism “He opposes the amnesty law.” That define a material and temporary scope of application “in such a broad or vague manner as to undermine the beneficial effect” of community regulations.
However, the Commission said it was up to the Spanish judicial system to determine the extent to which the amnesty law includes broad material and temporary application.
Beyond the European justice system’s ruling on amnesty, the Constitutional Court still has to decide whether the Supreme Court should grant amnesty. The crime of embezzlement attributed, among others, to Carles Puigdemontin a sentence that may be essential for his return to Spain.
About The Author
