The ex-president of the Catalan government, Carles Puigdemont, and the exconseller Toni Comín have requested the Constitutional Court to lift of how urgent your orders national of arrest and imprisonment by virtue of his parliamentary immunity as members of parliament. Puigdemont and Comín, fleeing from 2017 and newly recognized meps for the European Parliament, have filed an appeal, against the order of the Criminal Chamber confirmed that the refusal of the investigating judge of the procés, Paul Llarena, to leave without effect to its orders national of arrest and imprisonment.
In its letter, dated last January 3, asks the court of guarantees to stop so cautelarísima the above-mentioned self —and, therefore, the orders of detention and other precautionary measures— in that decides if granted the amparo. Both processed in the cause of the procés, argue that the decision of the board and of Llarena of violations of their rights, among them the access in equal conditions to public office, the freedom and equality or to move freely in and out of Spain without limitation for reasons ideological or political.
The expresident and the exconseller make reference to the “state of anomaly “democratic” generated, in its judgment, the Supreme Court and the “absolute contempt” on the part of the organs of criminal jurisdiction for the immunities included in the European Union. His judgment was “inexcusable” to lift the warrants of arrest from the moment of its proclamation, and point out that only could be maintained once obtained, the suplicatorio (authorization) of the European Parliament.
MORE INFORMATION
Puigdemont and Commonly relinquish their seats in the Parliament Puigdemont bet by depleting the legislature Catalan
Remember that the immunity guarantees freedom of movement of meps and re-argue —as they did in other of his later writings— the “link” between an mp and their constituents, which turns out to be “absolutely incompatible” with his arrest and imprisonment.
The defense of the accused escaped load hard against Llarena and the Room and states that refused to raise a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union —as they requested— so “arbitrary and unreasonable”.
And they also believe that they have received “unequal treatment” with respect to those sentenced by the procés, given that the court that judged itself that chose to ask the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
But believe that the judgment of the CJEU on Oriol Junqueras does not raise any doubts in your case, suggest that, in doing so, the TC should raise a prejudicial question to Europe on their situation and if the refusal of the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme to consult with the court was a breach of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
