Tuesday, September 28

The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court defends that an opinion of the UN Human Rights Committee does not bind it

The Special Chamber of the Supreme Court considers that an opinion of the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations (UN), such as the one that has proved the former judge Baltasar Garzón, does not bind him, since only the resolutions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) enable the review of judgments.

Garzón, after the opinion of the Human Rights committee: “The only way to compensate for the damage is to regain my position”

Know more

In a judgment of February 12, 2020, advanced by La Razón and to which Europa Press has had access, the High Court indicates that “it is not appropriate to equate the judgments of the ECHR with the recommendations or opinions of the different Committees of the various international organizations that pronounce on the fulfillment of the obligations assumed by Spain in the matter of human rights “. This Friday, sources of the Supreme They have ratified this opinion to InfoLibre.

The magistrates, among those who sign in the president of the General Council of the Judicial Power (CGPJ) and the Supreme Court Carlos Lesmes, recall that Organic Law 7/2015, of June 21, provides that only the resolutions of the ECHR are empowering to the “review of the judgments in which the fundamental right was violated.”

According to article 5 bis of the Organic Law of the Judiciary, an appeal for review may be filed before the Supreme Court against a final judicial decision, in accordance with the procedural rules of each jurisdictional order, when the ECHR has declared that said resolution has been issued. in “violation of any of the rights recognized in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols.”

Furthermore, the regulations specify that the sentence will be reviewed “provided that the violation, due to its nature and gravity, entails effects that pursue and cannot be stopped in any way other than through this review.”

Former judge Garzón, within the framework of his defense strategy, appealed his case to the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights. Both of them flatly denied his appeals against the conviction for prevarication imposed by the Supreme Court. This Thursday the UN Human Rights Committee has agreed.

The UN agencies believe that the Supreme Court violated the presumption of innocence and the former magistrate skipped the mandatory guarantees of a judicial process when in 2012 he sentenced him to 11 years of disqualification for tapping the phones of lawyers for the main defendants in the Gürtel case , who then instructed from the National High Court.

The resolution of the United Nations body, to which elDiario.es has had access, assumes that the judicial process that ended Garzón’s career was “arbitrary”, which did not guarantee the impartiality of the magistrates who participated in the conviction. and criticizes that he was deprived of a second instance before which he could appeal his disqualification.

In view of all the above, the UN body demands that the Spanish State provide “comprehensive reparation” to Garzón, to erase his criminal record and provide him with “adequate compensation for the damage suffered.” The ruling gives Spain six months to “guarantee effective reparation” to Garzón for the injured rights.