The Supreme Court maintains that talking about 'Legal Affairs'is not a crime of threats. In a recent letter, the Criminal Chamber decided to reject a complaint Clean hands against Gabriel Rufián, Jordi Turull and Santos Cerdán in which they accused the three politicians of threatening judges as Manuel Garcia Castellón, Pablo Llarena or Manuel Marchena when we talk about 'justice' in various public interventions, some from the gallery of Congress. The judges explain that it may be a matter of “disrespect”, but in no case a crime of threats, as the ultra-pseudo-union claims. promotes the popular accusation against Begoña Gómez.
Last May, the Supreme Court already had the opportunity to rule a similar complaint filed by Clean Hands against Miriam Nogueras, spokesperson for Junts in Congress. The pro-independence lawmaker referred to six judges who had participated in the trial, insisting that “they should be tried and dismissed immediately,” and described these judges as “indecent.”
The Supreme He has already rejected that first complaintexplaining that Nogueras's statements were protected by the parliamentary immunity of deputies and senators when they speak from the gallery. He then had to analyze a second criminal case brought by Clean Hands against other politicians for similar statements, although not all of them had been issued by the Congress of Deputies.
In this case, the ultra-pseudo-union of Miguel Bernad accused Gabriel Rufián (ERC), Santos Cerdán (PSOE) and Jordi Turull (Junts) of a crime of threats because they referred to 'lawfare' at various points in the negotiations on investments. Pedro Sánchez, President of the Government, and to implement the amnesty. For Clean Hands, for example, the allusion to 'lawfare' made in the agreement between the PSOE and 'unequivocally reflects a crime of threats against the judiciary'.
Clean Hands said the same about the investigation commissions planned on this issue. Gabriel Rufián also left “clear threats to judges in general and, in particular, to those involved in the criminal processes of secessionism” in the Sánchez investiture debate. Finally, the ultra organization highlighted on TV3 some words from Turull about the amnesty to add him to the list of alleged perpetrators of the threats.
The Supreme Court understands that none of these statements or allusions to 'justice' can be considered a crime of threats. “We are left with merely generic statements against the judiciary while we consider its possible actions in the future,” the Supreme Court said.
The statements of the accused politicians, the Court explains, “may be accused of a lack of respect and consideration for the magistrates to whom they specifically refer and for one of the powers of the State in general, such as the judiciary”, but “there is no threat of harm being done to them or to people close to them.”