The second view in General Court of the European Union (TGUE) to analyze the immunity of Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Clara Ponsatí rose in tone, this Friday, with the intervention of the lawyer of the European Parliament, when he assured that in the light of the latest resolutions of the TGUE “Puigdemont probably obtained the act illegally, and the European Parliament has allowed it”.
The Chief Advocate of the Legal Services of the European Chamber, Norberto Lorenzhe also vehemently defended the rapporteur of the Parliament’s legal affairs committee who dealt with the judge’s request to Llarena to waive the immunity of Puigdemont, the Bulgarian ultra-conservative Angelo Dzhambazki. “He is not from the Vox party and the statement ‘Puigdemont in prison’ was pronounced in a political act, in March 2018, before the parliamentary elections”, said the lawyer who strongly defended the freedom of expression of politicians , and that no biased expression was made in the Juri commission. “All MEPs are defending positions and Parliament could not have presidents or rapporteurs for committees,” she said.
Puigdemont is an “escapee”
For his part, the State Attorney, Andrea Gavela He insisted that the Spanish State “is a guarantee system” and that President Puigdemont “fled from the justice of a Union State”, and was declared in absentia in 2018 and the criminal case against him was interrupted. He added that when the Supreme Court convicted the political prisoners of sedition and embezzlement in December 2019, the judge, following the rules, issued the Eurowarrant and the request to the European Parliament to stop it.
Gavela also denied that there is political persecution of Catalan separatists and assured that the criminal proceedings began before Puigdemont obtained the act of MEP and, therefore, there was no need to solicit the request. Conversely, Gonzalo Boye detailed the reasons for the persecution of Catalan MEPs “for representing a national minority”.
A referendum from Europe
As for immunity, Parliament’s lawyer stated that it is an “anachronistic” figure and that it should be limited as much as possible. He also indicated that in requests for immunity, the committee analyzes whether it affects the functioning of the European Parliament. Norbert Lorenz even admitted that if Puigdemont, Comín and Ponsatí in May 2020 “had taken active action in the European Parliament and presented motions on the independence of Catalonia and the calling of the referendumand then a criminal proceeding had been initiated against them, it would have been evaluated in another way”.
