Thursday, July 7

The Catalan Supreme Court files the case against a CUP deputy because she only moved a fence in a demonstration

“Remove a fence that gave access to a street from which you could access the Palace of Justice of Tarragona.” For this fact, the CUP deputy Laia Estrada has been charged for three years. Until this Friday. The Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) has filed the case for public disorder and disobedience against the deputy opened by a Tarragona judge who even ordered the arrest of Estrada despite her status as a gauge before the Catalan high court.

The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJC puts an end to the case with reproaches to the investigating magistrate. The robes point out that the request of the Tarragona judge to impute Estrada presents “an argumentative deficit” by not collecting “the alleged criminal activity” of the parliamentarian. In other words, that the judge asked to investigate Estrada without describing what crime he committed.

The only fact attributed to Estrada by the judge and the report from the Mossos d’Esquadra was to remove a fence in the protest in the city of Tarragona against the 2018 Council of Ministers of Barcelona. From this fact, the Chamber abounds, “the alleged commission of a crime of public disorder and / or disobedience cannot be inferred.” The Prosecutor’s Office had already requested the file of the case.

The Tarragona judge ordered the arrest of Estrada last May to take a statement as investigated, although a day later he annulled the arrest after the controversy raised. The magistrate of the examining court 6 of Tarragona, Milagros Nieto, indicated that “having reexamined” the case and in view of “the doubts raised” about the instruction of the TSJC itself, it was necessary to act “prudently” and “nullify” the arrest of Estrada.

The Tarragona magistrate made this decision after sending the entire case to the TSJC and receiving a first refusal from the Catalan high court to assume it. The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJC considered “practically non-existent” the investigation of the judge regarding Estrada, and described it as “totally insufficient” to attribute to the deputy her participation in an alleged crime of public disorder.

The TSJC also reminded the magistrate that the correct way to act was to raise a reasoned statement on the reasons why the Catalan high court should undertake the investigation against Estrada, and not send the entire case as the Tarragona instructor did, in the that five other people who are not gauged are being investigated. But the result, once the rationale had been sent, has been the closing of the cause.