Him former president of the Generalitat of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, asked the Constitutional Court to revoke the arrest order issued against him by the Supreme Court in the context of the case on process, which would allow him to return to Spain without the risk of ending up in prison, according to what he announced. The world and confirmed EL PAÍS. Supporting it after both the Constitutional Court and the report of the conclusions of the Attorney General of the European Union have validated the amnesty law, supports the defense of former president, This would be “irreparable damage such as to make the appeal for protection” requested before the same Court lose effectiveness.
Carles Puigdemont, together with other leaders of the processes Having been decided by the Supreme Court that the amnesty law was not applicable to them, they appealed to the Constitutional Court for protection, requesting its application and, therefore, the revocation of the arrest order against those who had fled to Belgium. The Constitutional Court accepted the appeals for consideration and opened a separate piece to study the arrest warrants. No date has been set for the deliberations.
Puigdemont’s writing, which adheres to another presented in the same sense by his former councilor Toni Comín, also a fugitive and living in Belgium since October 2017, claims that the European Union Attorney General’s report published last Thursday argues that the amnesty law is “fully compliant with the Union’s order”. And since the Constitutional Court, responsible for resolving the appeal for protection of both against the Supreme Court’s decision not to apply the amnesty, has already ruled on the full constitutionality of the law, it “cannot be deprived of practical effectiveness due to the persistence of restrictive criminal measures”.
Nonetheless, the Advocate General’s report is not binding and the Court of Justice of the European Union itself will establish, through a ruling, the legally binding position.
However, Puigdemont’s lawyer argues that “the jurisprudence consistently follows the line of argumentation structured by the Attorney General, which gives his statements an undeniable qualitative purpose.” And consequently he incorporates it into the legal reality which in his opinion must be taken into account in the resolution. “It is not possible to maintain arrest warrants, not even temporarily, when the European law provides for immediate archiving as soon as the legal provisions are verified.”
