Thursday, July 29

Not running is cowardly

No vice and no brutality on earth has shed as much blood as human cowardice

Stefan zweig

I am amazed at the opportunistic cowardice that some of our country’s heroes wear and among them I frame a handful of them members of the Constitutional Court. I am referring to these magistrates who today tell us that part of the alarm law decree, the one that confined us at home in March of last year, was unconstitutional but that they saw fit to confine themselves in their homes with good care, they are of old age. , while hundreds of people died every day. Not only is it that they themselves accepted with absolute submission the circumstances and the legal response that the Spanish Government gave them – such as the French, the German, the British or the rest of the Westerners – but they did not give a war: not a declaration or Aim crying out for their trampled rights they did.

The same or worse we have to proclaim from the brave defenders of freedoms and rights of the Spanish who live under the acronym of Vox. Not content with voting affirmatively in Congress to support the declaration of the state of alarm and its extension, it was not until November 2020, last summer and the curve flattened, that they thought this could be a nice way to do it. lawfare to the government. In short: those who now bring us on a platter this beautiful ruling that will allow many people to have a weapon against the Government, supported like little lambs the need to confine ourselves when people died like bedbugs and when we still had neither the knowledge nor the means to protect ourselves in another way. Vox, which on Twitter officially asked the Government on March 12 “to consider decreeing the state of alarm.” Brave with a cause, come on.

Nor am I going to place much emphasis on the fact that the TC threw us on July 14, like dogs a bone, a controversial, adjusted failure, a failure with a neat and highly discussed and debatable technical component that leaves us fasting of arguments and counter arguments, because there is a great hurry to be able to give the headline that serves to say that the Government, the one that has just been renewed, did it like the ortho in the pandemic. In reality, few people are going to get the tense debate about whether rights were suspended or limited and whether the state of alarm allows the suspension of rights or the emergency state to be used for a health crisis.

The truth is that out of decency the Constitutional Court should have said that neither the Government nor the Parliament had in their hands to do otherwise. Law 4/1981 makes clear the cases in which states of constitutional exceptionality can be used and among them the state of exception, which they now determine as their own to limit those freedoms. The planned path is to analyze the exceptional severity assumption and see what state it corresponds to. It was the alarm that corresponded, the one that clearly refers in the law to health crises. That same law reserves for the state of emergency situations of public order crisis in which the free exercise of fundamental rights or the functioning of the institutions is seriously altered. We all know that this did not happen in March 2020. I think that even the six Constitutional magistrates found out about it. So I would like to know how they argue in that resolution that we do not know – and that when it arrives, it will bring people to a halt – that yes, it should have been used.

A different thing is if all the restrictions that the virus forced to do – it was the characteristics of the transmission and the need to flatten the contagion curve that led to the measures – entered and were planned within the state of alarm. They could doubt the protection of home confinement, but could not assure that the state of emergency should have been decreed. They have chosen as they count for this aberration.

The issue is so harshly political that even Magistrate Andrés Ollero, who was a PP deputy for 17 years, has had the intellectual and legal shame of not putting his signature on that resolution. It is the second time that he stands out from such an outrage. The conservative president of the court, González Rivas, has joined him to maintain, together with the progressives Xiol, Conde-Pumpido and Balaguer, that the state of alarm was adequate. But Pedro González-Trevijano, appointed at the proposal of the Government of Rajoy, has managed to crush this strange majority that has counted on the vote of the “progressive” vice president of the TC and that will mark in the future the possibilities of new statements of the state of alarm. In other words, it is better that another bug does not come and it is better that we do not have to flatten a curve that had more than 900 deaths a day, because with the decision that now serves us they do not put us at home or back. Remember that the alternative that the TC gives is inappropriate and clearly impossible.

But the six of the TC have not wanted to make a hole in the State – it is only worth giving the Government tow, without realizing that they give it the same to the majority of the Chamber that supported it – and they save the possibility that it is necessary to compensate to anyone for this unconstitutional restriction, according to them, of a fundamental right. They remain to annul the fines. Another issue that will be of great use to future governments if unfortunately we find ourselves in circumstances of extreme risk. They will not be able to use the constitutional instrument and neither will God pay attention to them. I hope I don’t see it.

An expired and fractured court has issued a ruling, not yet a resolution, whose main objective is to give shrapnel to those who intend to continue firing at the Government. They will not care that they themselves, with their deputies, endorsed such a measure, because here nothing matters anymore.

I am grateful that we implemented a legal mechanism, endorsed by the representatives of the people, which saved many lives. Others prefer to be late and make amends for what they would not have had the guts to do while death stalked us. Arriving late with very questionable squeamishness and when it no longer matters is very cowardly. Taking the measures when they were necessary, an exercise of responsibility that they did not have to assume. Goodness.

Leave a Reply

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