Catalun independence vote

[The Inquisitor]

20 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

The Constitutional Court can suspend everything in Spain because they want. They don't even respect their own laws as I explained on my essay about the Statute of 2006 that was cut twice and that let this whole thing happen. The G

 Not at all my dear, that is your unfounded opinion. The Constitutional Court of Spain is the organ that veils for the Constitutionality of our laws and that the actions and decisions taken by the powers of the State are in accordance with the precepts of the Constitution, which is the "magna lex" of your country, Spain.

We can discuss all you want about is nature its characteristics, its jurisdictional nature which is not incardinated in the judicial power per se, and the method of election of its members (which is supported, surprise, surprise, by the main party that holds the Catalan regional government whenever they place one of their candidates in their midst) for these things may well merit a separate discussion.

If their rulings and opinions do not match your separatist whims and back the excluding and illegal political agenda of the representatives you have chosen it isn't because they can suspend anything they want, its because it doesn't fit in the Constitution.

You see, in our country, Spain, you are free to express your opinion, publish what you will and say what you damn please. But this is precisely the problem when you fall prey to the illusions and fantasies that your separatist ideology imposes on you. That you think that everyone and every institution of the State is against you. Well, you see, it isn't. The judges of the Constitutional court don't wake every single morning thinking how they are going to screw up Catalans that day. They just guarantee, among other functions, that our set of laws respect constitutional precepts.

If you allow me, you should at least try to develop your own sense of embarrassment as a natural preservation mechanism. I honestly think using as a measure of authority in this matter the school or university essay you have written about the statute of autonomy of Catalonia doesn't help your case, especially given the level of insight you have shown so far in this thread. 

[HexMachina]

2 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

I will tell you what I call this. It's the normal use of the instruments of the State to uphold the rule of law in a proportionate manner. Because make no mistake, the police did not beat people in Catalonia at voting stations because they were voting as is what the secessionists claim and moan about. The police used force when the demonstrators/voters refused to comply with a ruling of the High Court of Catalonia which declared the referendum illegal and ordered the voting stations to be cleared and when the demonstrators/voters began to be an obstacle for legality to be upheld. What is despicable is that there wer cases of independentists using children and old people as human shields.

What led to this situation was the fact that the Catalan regional police under the control lf the Catalan regional government, in their role as judiciary police of first choice in Catalonia (that is, the police body that carries out the courts' resolutions) ignored the ruling the High Court of Catalonia. This led to the Spanish National Police and Civil Guard to carry out the bidding of the High Court of Catalonia. This is seditious in itself, since an institution of the Spanish sate (the Catalan regional government, which in fact is the highest representative of the Spanish State in Catalonia) deliberately ignored a ruling of a power of the sate (the High Court of Catalonia). This situation is being studied as we speak by the  Spanish Attorney General's office and may lead, if there's evidence for it, high ranking officers of the Catalan government and the Catalan regional police to be tried for a crime of sedition and disobedience.

Ladies and gents, make no mistake, this is what is happening in Catalonia right now. A situation in which one power of the Spanish State is outside of the rule of law, in a clear attempt to shatter the legality and the set of laws that serve as a frame to the Spanish society. In short a coup d'etat. I suspect you will understand that the first duty of any government and any consitutional power in a liberal and western democracy is to uphold the rule of law. For Spaniards, including Catalans, are free in short to disagree with the law, but not to disobey it.

It's a similar situation to what happened with the police action and the charges at the G20 summit in Hamburg, and yet I don't hear many of you bleating about how it was an act of repression by the naughty naughty government of Germany.

Now, is you ask me if it was pretty? No it wasn't. Did I like it? No I didn't. Did I support? No, I did not. Did I enjoy it? No, of course not. Was it necessary? Probably not. Was it a sign of brutality and repression as the "victims" and their political leaders claim? Most assuredly not. It was a proportionate use of force by a power of the state.

You contradict yourself at the end there. If it wasn't necessary then it was not proportionate. You are familiar, I presume, with the tests usually applied by courts in the case of proportionality? It involves a "necessary" component

[The Inquisitor]

1 minute ago, HelenaExMachina said:

You contradict yourself at the end there. If it wasn't necessary then it was not proportionate

No, I don't contradict myself at all. 

I say it was probably not necessary, a personal opinion, since there might -or might not have been, ( I frankly do not know) other ways to have had acted.

It was proportionate if only because in any liberal western democracy the powers of the State hold the monopoly of violence, following established practices. They include the possibility to use force to uphold legality and avoid the commitment of illegal acts, such as the referendum, when ordered by the courts of law.

[Maltaran]

IIRC, the Inquisitor is the same guy who some years ago used to regularly claim that Gibraltar was rightfully Spanish despite 99% of Gibraltarians voting otherwise, so I’m not sure how much weight should be given to his opinions about what is and isn’t Spanish territory or a valid referendum.

If I’m misremembering and this wasn’t you, then I apologise and please ignore this post.

[Meera of Tarth]

5 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

 Not at all my dear, that is your unfounded opinion. 

You should re-read my essay from pg6 (with its source) especially the part in blue that refers to the statement I was speaking about (in case you are interested, of course).

As for the rest of your paragraph, no idea what you are talking about (I have never said I am Spanish, separatist or anything you refer to) and no idea of what "embarrassment", or "level of insight" , etc refers to either. That's the last think I'll say to you in this thread since I think your comments are a bit offensive.

[The Inquisitor]

3 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

IIRC, the Inquisitor is the same guy who some years ago used to regularly claim that Gibraltar was rightfully Spanish despite 99% of Gibraltarians voting otherwise, so I’m not sure how much weight should be given to his opinions about what is and isn’t Spanish territory or a valid referendum.

If I’m misremembering and this wasn’t you, then I apologise and please ignore this post.

You remember correctly.

I maintain that Gibraltar should be rightfully Spanish, but the problem for Spain is that Gibraltarians nor the UK want it. So there is nothing much left to be discussed, now is it?

I don't know how that (nor frankly anything I have posted since I joined the ezboard or its antecessor sometime in 1996 IIRC) has anything to do with this issue at hand or my opinions in this matter. You see, my opinions happen to be backed by the resolutions of the constitutional powers of Spain in case you are interested in having yourself a formed opinion or more knowledge of this issue.

But hey, nice try to discredit my posts champ! Please try again.

A pleasure meeting you again.

[baxus]

6 hours ago, Loge said:

The narrative in the Western media at the time was that there was a genocide or at least ethnic cleansing going on (the Serbs being the perpetrators). There doesn't seem to be evidence for that, though. The West just fell for the Kosovo Liberation Army's propaganda. Iraq wasn't the first time the West waged war in blatant breach of international law over a lie.

Well, considering that Kosovo population is now almost 100% Albanian and that wasn't the case 20-ish years ago, I'd say there was some ethnic cleansing going on. Unfortunately for Western media, as you put it, it's not the one they have been reporting on.

There definitely was some wrongdoing from Yugoslav government (included but not limited to actions of armed forces) but some very important aspects of the whole picture are not being talked about. Serbian media are guilty of the same thing, if we're honest. The only difference is that they have been trying to paint this picture of Albanians rising up for no reason at all, just for laughs.

Anyway, this is the thread about another topic, so let's not derail it further.  

[The Inquisitor]

34 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

That's the last think I'll say to you in this thread since I think your comments are a bit offensive.

If you took offense, I apologise.

Yet I stand by my comments.

[baxus]

3 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

I will tell you what I call this. It's the normal use of the instruments of the State to uphold the rule of law in a proportionate manner. Because make no mistake, the police did not beat people in Catalonia at voting stations because they were voting as is what the secessionists claim and moan about. The police used force when the demonstrators/voters refused to comply with a ruling of the High Court of Catalonia which declared the referendum illegal and ordered the voting stations to be cleared and when the demonstrators/voters began to be an obstacle for legality to be upheld. What is despicable is that there wer cases of independentists using children and old people as human shields.

<snip>

It was a proportionate use of force by a power of the state.

As someone who's spent his entire life in a country where government abusing police is nothing unusual, let me tell you that was definitely not "the normal use of instruments of the State to uphold the rule of law in a proportionate manner". That was nothing but a display of power and an attempt to intimidate both the people who wanted to vote and politicians who organized the voting.

I can understand if the whole situation is new to you so you can't really differentiate properly between the two and I hope this fiasco is a one-off so you never get enough experience you can, but you can trust me on that.

If "the State" wanted to use "the instruments to uphold the rule of law in a proportionate manner", they would've stopped the referendum from taking place to begin with, or they would've let it run its course then arrested the people responsible for its organization. If the referendum was illegal, as has been repeated so often in this thread, then the prosecution would definitely have a case and the government wouldn't have lost face the way it did by beating the people.

[The Inquisitor]

2 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

You should re-read my essay from pg6 (with its source) especially the part in blue that refers to the statement I was speaking about (in case you are interested, of course).

Yes, I'm interested.

However, I can't find that essay you mention.

Is this "essay" you refer to your post on pg 6 in which you make a disorderly and superficial account of the botched reform process of the Catalan statute of Autonomy with blue inserts and links to youtube videos of speeches by Zapatero and Guerra?

Is this "source" you mention a wikipedia article on the Catalan statute of Autonomy?

Really?

Honestly please help me.

[Relic]

4 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

You see Relic, I think I've already expressed my opinion on what the next steps should be. 

Making an effort to ignore your snide remarks and use of adjectives, I'll gladly explain to you in case you are truly interested what I think the next steps should be.

In a situation in which the rule of law has been breached and is beign breached as we speak off by the highest representative of the Spanish State in Catalonia, the Catalan regional Government, the powers of the State should uphold the rule of law by all means, making use of all the instruments and means that the Constitution and our set of laws grant our society.

Under the threat of a coup by the Catalan regional government and the threat of an unilateral proclamation of independence, the remaining powers of the State should not flinch and reply point by point, with the law and for the law.

As someone else said way better than me, and paraphrasing borrowed words, Spaniards, among them Catalanas, are free, in short, to disagree with the law but not to disobey it. For in a government of laws and not of men, no man, however prominent or powerful, and no mob, however unruly or boisterous, is entitled to defy a court of law. If this country should ever reach the point where any man or group of men by force or threat of force could long defy the commands of our court and our Constitution, then no law would stand free from doubt, no judge would be sure of his writ, and no citizen would be safe from his neighbors

Once, and only once constitutional order and normalcy have been reattained, a political discussion and dialogue should be had in order to see how we can move forward from this horrible situation that has led to the fracture of the Catalan society by, mind, a disloyal regional government that has decided to place itself outside of the law. This solution, political in nature and born of dialogue and common loyalty between parts should be found within the law and using the tools that the law gives us as a society. This may take years and even generations, but no power can place itself outside the Constitution and the law to press for a political agenda. This only leads to injustice, frustration and the tension that we are living as a nation in Spain these ill fated days. This political solution, whatever it might be (and frankly I have no idea what it can be except it has to be born out of consensus), can't take place right now when our society, the Catalan society mos essentially, is torn in half and tensions are ripe.

You are welcome.

Wait,  you made an effort to avoid the MY snide remarks?  Oh,  the irony.  

[Maltaran]

2 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

I maintain that Gibraltar should be rightfully Spanish, but the problem for Spain is that Gibraltarians nor the UK want it. So there is nothing much left to be discussed, now is it?

 

And the Catalans, it seems, don't want to be Spanish either. The situations appear to be similar.

[The Inquisitor]

5 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

And the Catalans, it seems, don't want to be Spanish either.

Wrong, my dear chap.

You only missed one single word to actually make perfect sense. Ah, its a game of inches... I suspect you just don't yet grasp the issue completely.

Now, let me correct that for you...

"And some Catalans, it seems, don't want to be Spanish either". 

 

11 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

The situations appear to be similar.

More than you think, indeed.

For if Spain wants to regain Gibraltar it must do so by placing herself outside the law and without heeding those whose opinion must be sought, pretty much like the independentist faction with regards to their illegal referendum and their drive for secession. 

Close call! Better luck next time!

[Maltaran]

3 hours ago, The Inquisitor said:

 

For if Spain wants to regain Gibraltar it must do so by placing herself outside the law and without heeding those whose opinion must be sought, pretty much like the independentist faction with regards to their illegal referendum and their drive for secession. 

I disagree, the referendum was gaining the opinion of those whose opinion must be sought. If you want to argue that the low turnout makes acting on the result dubious, I could be persuaded, but from a moral standpoint I don’t believe the rest of Spain can force Catalonia to remain if they choose to leave, just like the EU27 can’t prevent Brexit even though I personally might want to stop it.

[Mentat]

I don't think bringing Gibraltar into the conversation is particularly useful.

International laws and sovereign states are sticklers for maintaining status quo as regards the sovereignty of states over their territories. If Spain was to enter Gibraltar and claim it as part of its territory, it would be seen as an intolerable infringement on Britain's sovereignty and the kind of thing that would earn you trade sanctions, a UN security council telling off, etc regardless of whether the people of Gibraltar wanted to become Spanish or stay British. Only the acquiescence of Great Britain would make this acceptable. Whatever the people of Gibraltar actually wanted would probably be taken into consideration but it would not be the deciding factor.

This is the reason why the Catalan government has tried its best to make Spain allow a referendum. They are well aware that, without Spain's acquiescence, any declaration of independence will have a very cold reception by the international community. Maintaining the sovereignty status quo will surely take preference.

There are obviously good reasons for this (you respect my sovereignty and I'll respect yours), and I'd argue it has prevented more conflicts than it has provoked.  

[Tijgy]

1 hour ago, Mentat said:

This is the reason why the Catalan government has tried its best to make Spain allow a referendum. They are well aware that, without Spain's acquiescence, any declaration of independence will have a very cold reception by the international community. Maintaining the sovereignty status quo will surely take preference.

It all depends on what actually is interesting for your own geopolitical interests and internal politics. 

The independence of Belgium was accepted thanks to British because they thought it was interesting to have a neutral buffer state between Germany and France. 

The United Kingdom, France, ... will not accept an unilateral declaration of independence of Catalonia to defend their own internal national integrity (to avoid a precedent although there are already precedents) unless they have actually to gain something with an independent Catalonian.

And the European Union probably don't want to interfere in a sensitive issue which apparently exists for centuries. 

[Mentat]

24 minutes ago, Tijgy said:

The independence of Belgium was accepted thanks to British because they thought it was interesting to have a neutral buffer state between Germany and France. 

The United Kingdom, France, ... will not accept an unilateral declaration of independence of Catalonia to defend their own internal national integrity (to avoid a precedent although there are already precedents) unless they have actually to gain something with an independent Catalonian.

And the European Union probably don't want to interfere in a sensitive issue which apparently exists for centuries. 

On the EU: Agreed.

On your first two paragraphs: I think things have changed quite a lot since 1830. Even if the UK and France did have something to gain from a Catalan independence, I think they would be loathe to openly violate such a golden rule of international politics (though I'm not knowledgeable enough about UK and French politics to have a truly informed opinion).

[Tijgy]

30 minutes ago, Mentat said:

On your first two paragraphs: I think things have changed quite a lot since 1830. Even if the UK and France did have something to gain from a Catalan independence, I think they would be loathe to openly violate such a golden rule of international politics (though I'm not knowledgeable enough about UK and French politics to have a truly informed opinion).

The problem is that there isn't such a golden rule. When Kosovo declared themselves independent in 2008, several countries actually recognized it very soon. And the International Court of Justice said international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence - which in fact is a precedent.

You are a state when you are recognized by the rest of the world as a state. And countries doesn't really look at international rules. They think what is the most interesting for themselves, and they adjust the international rules to argument their case. 

For example: Kosovo isn't recognized as a state by Russia, but Russia invokes the precedent of Kosovo to declare the referendum of Crimea valid. 

[SirArthur]

1 minute ago, Tijgy said:

The problem is that there isn't such a golden rule. When Kosovo declared themselves independent in 2008, several countries actually recognized it very soon. And the International Court of Justice said international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence - which in fact is a precedent.

You are a state when you are recognized by the rest of the world as a state. And countries doesn't really look at international rules. They think what is the most interesting for themselves, and they adjust the international rules to argument their case. 

For example: Kosovo isn't recognized as a state by Russia, but Russia invokes the precedent of Kosovo to declare the referendum of Crimea valid. 

The only thing I take out of all of this and the only thing that holds true in declaring independence: Better look out for a protector. And I doubt France will find russian troops at their border very funny. 

[Meera of Tarth]

3 hours ago, Tijgy said:

The problem is that there isn't such a golden rule. When Kosovo declared themselves independent in 2008, several countries actually recognized it very soon. And the International Court of Justice said international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence - which in fact is a precedent.

You are a state when you are recognized by the rest of the world as a state. And countries doesn't really look at international rules. They think what is the most interesting for themselves, and they adjust the international rules to argument their case. 

For example: Kosovo isn't recognized as a state by Russia, but Russia invokes the precedent of Kosovo to declare the referendum of Crimea valid. 

That's also true.