The National Court does not consider terrorism as amnestiable and proposes to submit the CDR case to the European Justice

The National Court has serious doubts about the inclusion in the amnesty of the CDRs accused of terrorism. This Tuesday, the court gave the parties three days to decide whether to go to the European Justice, because amnesty for those accused of terrorism could be 'seriously' contrary to Community law and could constitute 'a patent infringement'.

This is what the Third Section of the Criminal Chamber of the Special Court pronounces in an order in which it responds to the requests to grant amnesty to the twelve activists of the Committees for the Defence of the Republic (CDR), who are accused of belonging to a terrorist organisation, a crime of destruction and possession of explosives, for which the Public Prosecution Service even demanded a prison sentence of up to 27 years.

The Public Prosecutor and the defense had requested that the amnesty be applied to all the defendants, on the understanding that they fell below the norm because they had not caused material damage, serious injury or any attack. On the other hand, the popular accusation of the Catalan Association of Victims of Terrorist Organizations had demanded that the court exclude the CDR from the law of penal forgetfulness of the trial.

The magistrates see no logic in the exclusion of terrorist crimes in the amnesty law only in the most serious form, which in principle was intended to include cases such as those of the CDR, which did not commit any attack or cause damage to people or infrastructure.

However, according to the court, this definition of terrorism that qualifies for amnesty is “contrary to the European Directive on combating terrorism, which states that any act of a terrorist nature is “extremely serious”.

The court accuses the legislator who approved the standard that, in defining terrorism for which amnesty is possible, “he may have had in mind what is socially and euphemistically called low-intensity terrorism, as if one terrorism could be classified as high-intensity terrorism and another as low-intensity terrorism.”

The National Court understands that the European Directive on combating terrorism does not distinguish between terrorist acts that cause serious harm and other acts that do not or are merely preparatory, but requires that they be prosecuted on an equal footing. Consequently, they cannot be granted amnesty.

“Limiting the exclusion from the amnesty to the most serious violations of human rights in the area of ​​terrorism is contrary to what a state under the rule of law must always strive for, the eradication and elimination of all forms of terrorism,” said de Sala, stressing that European regulations make no “any distinction” between types of terrorism.

“The logic that follows from European standards implies that all forms of terrorism are extremely serious and therefore should not be subject to amnesty or forgiveness,” concluded the court formed by Judges Alfonso Guevara, Jesús Eduardo Gutiérrez and Carlos Fraile.

Source link

Leave a Comment

data data data data data data data data data data data data data