Monday, October 18

Lawyers of the Parliament tell the judge that to reprove the monarchy is a “political proclamation”

The former secretary general and the former mayor of the Parliament, Xavier Muro and Joan Ridao, explained to the judge on Wednesday that the motions on self-determination and the rejection of the monarchy for which the former president of the Chamber Roger Torrent is being investigated were mere ” political proclamations “which, in his opinion, did not contravene the notices of the Constitutional Court.

Muro and Ridao have appeared this Wednesday as witnesses in the case for disobedience that is being followed by the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) against Torrent and four other former members of the Table for having allowed the debate and voting in 2019 of two motions on self-determination and to reprove the monarchy.

Unlike previous cases related to the sovereign process, in which the lawyers became the main prosecution witness of the Prosecutor’s Office by reaffirming the warnings they made to the Table not to develop initiatives vetoed by the Constitutional Court, on this occasion their testimony it has given air to the defenses.

According to legal sources, the investigating magistrate, Maria Eugènia Alegret, has borne the burden of the interrogations, which have lasted almost four hours, with very detailed questions to know the exact chronology of the investigated events.

According to the Prosecutor’s Office, Torrent and his independentist colleagues in the Table processed two resolutions in the last legislature in favor of exercising the right to self-determination and to reprove the monarchy despite the warnings of its illegality by the Secretary General of the Parliament and knowingly that the Constitutional Court had prohibited it.

In their statements, on the other hand, Muro and Ridao have not been as forceful as the prosecutor maintains, and have stated that the situation in which the motions were debated was not related to the moments of tension in the Chamber experienced during the process.

In fact, in one of the motions, they recalled, the Constitutional resolution that prohibited the debate came after their vote, so they could not express any legal warning to the Table. Of course, they have made it clear that once the notifications were received, none of the motions were published in the Official Gazette of the Parliament.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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