Spain’s highest court, the Supreme Court, has refused to grant amnesty to independence activist Carles Puigdemont, who has been in exile since Catalonia’s failed secession attempt in 2017, and has upheld the arrest warrant against him.
“The judge of the Supreme Court rendered [lundi 1er juillet] an order in which he declares the amnesty not applicable to the crime of embezzlement in the case targeting the former president of the Generalitat Carles Puigdemont”the court detailed in a statement. This decision can be appealed within three days of notification to the parties, the document specifies.
On May 30, the Spanish Parliament adopted an amnesty law for Catalan separatists – the price paid by the socialist Prime Minister, Pedro Sanchez, to be returned to power in November 2023 thanks to the support of the two Catalan separatist parties.
Read also | Spain definitively adopts an amnesty law for Catalan independence fighters
Add to your selections
More than four hundred people prosecuted or convicted
The law was signed into law on June 11. The lawmakers’ goal was for the courts to begin canceling arrest warrants for separatists who fled abroad without delay, and for those cancellations to remain in effect pending the review of appeals filed against the law, a process that can take months or even years.
More than four hundred people are being prosecuted or convicted for offenses linked to Catalonia’s attempt at independence in 2017: the task promises to be difficult for the courts, who must decide on a case-by-case basis.
The law was intended to allow the return of exiled separatists, including Mr Puigdemont, president of the Catalan regional government during the events of 2017. Charged with embezzlement, disobedience and terrorism, Mr Puigdemont hoped to be able to return to Spain quickly after the law was promulgated.
The Supreme Court ruled that the amnesty law did apply to the crime of disobedience, but that ” behaviors “ accused Mr Puigdemont and two other independentists “fully correspond to the two exceptions provided for by the law” with regard to the offence of embezzlement.
Concretely, the magistrate concluded that there was a desire on the part of Mr. Puigdemont to obtain a personal benefit, as well as an impact on the financial interests of the European Union, which makes the amnesty inapplicable to their eyes. Therefore, the arrest warrant “is maintained only for the crime of embezzlement, not for that of disobedience”according to the document. The crime of terrorism with which Mr Puigdemont is also accused in a separate case is not addressed in this judgment.
