Madrid, Jul 1 (EFE) .- The Supreme Court has approved the abstention of the magistrate rapporteur of the appeal of the President of the Generalitat, Quim Torra, against his conviction of disqualification and has agreed in turn to reject the challenge for processing that he raised against almost all the magistrates that make up the Criminal Chamber.

It has been precisely this same Chamber meeting in plenary session that has accepted that the magistrate Miguel Colmenero deviate from the procedure that will review the sentence issued by the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, as he requested after being appointed a member of the Board Central Electoral.



That sentence sentenced Torra to a year and a half of disqualification for a crime of disobedience for not removing the yellow ties from public buildings during the electoral period and will be reviewed by the Supreme Court on September 17.

After accepting the abstention of the Colmenero magistrate, a new rapporteur must now be appointed in charge of writing the president’s sentence.

Shortly after this magistrate asked to withdraw from the case, Torra’s lawyer requested to separate eleven other judges of the Criminal Chamber who were responsible for resolving the request for abstention by doubting its impartiality, an “extemporaneous” request, according to the order issued this Wednesday by the plenary session.

In the opinion of the magistrates, the challenge raised is based on “causes that are invoked arbitrarily, that are not related to the object of the lawsuit or cause, which is none other than an incident of abstention.”

Resolving said request for abstention, the order continues, does not compromise the impartiality of the magistrates, who only limit themselves to deciding whether or not it is justified.

Furthermore, the fact that the challenge is filed against the entire Criminal Chamber in the heart of an incident of abstention means that, according to different resolutions of the Constitutional Court, it lacks “legal substantivity and is not creditor of a decision on the merits “.



In his writing, Torra asked to recuse the magistrates for the participation of the judges in the trial of the “proc├ęs” and all the previous actions, such as arrest warrants and imprisonment, instruction or for their participation in the Central Electoral Board and the Attorney General’s Office, always related to the proceedings of the convicted pro-independence leaders.

But for the Supreme Court “everything that the appellant exposes in his recusal brief is absolutely inane: if certain magistrates are members of the Central Electoral Board, if they have participated in other proceedings that – according to their subjective perception – bear any relation to the present recourse or if they have adopted certain decisions on the freedom of other people. “EFE



Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.