Catalun independence vote

[Tijgy]

59 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

while i disagree with the UDI decision of Puigdemont he is so smart for having gone to Brussels. And I agree with you, prison is just too much (suspensin, fines....but prison without bail??). This will make the problem worse. Indeed, their electoral program Said they would do that.

I think it had to stop with declaring the referendum illegal and maybe a suspension. But everything personally attacking the ministers and the representatives is a violation of democracy. 

He was seen today in Brussels by the Spanish media ( the stalkers), drinking something in a little café.

We will see what is now going to happen. But he has now the change to put already in beginning the argument for a non-Spanish judge the Spanish Justice System lacks impartiality and he wouldn't get a fair trial in Spain. The thing is however IIRC Belgian judges never really accepted the argument of human rights to decline the execution of an EAW. However IIRC not one Belgian judge actually accepted that reason to deny the execution. But his changes are bigger in Belgium than in Spain - and if one of the political parties dare to meddle in the legal process, the government will never survive it when this becomes public. 

And our Flemish Minister-President says he is "shocked" by the decision to imprison the elected governmental leaders and the only way to solve a political crisis should done by dialogue and by democratic instruments like elections. He also says he is astonished this can happen in contemporary Europe and  he asks the European Institutions to finally search together with Spain and Catalonia for a solution. (http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20171102_03165714). 

[Tijgy]

2 hours ago, Mentat said:

The legal ramifications of this are complicated. I don't think anyone is actually being prosecuted for their actions in a legislative body. Catalan politicians are being prosecuted for their actions as a part of the Catalan government (i.e. the administration, or the executive). As a member of the administration it's actually easy to be prosecuted, and there are quite a few crimes that you can only commit as a member of the administration (like taking bribes, corruption, etc.). Catalan politicians represent the will of the Catalan people, but that doesn't mean they can break the law.

I know that mostly the government is being prosecuted but I also heard the president of the Parliament is being prosecuted? I might be wrong but I thought it was because she did allow the vote for the declaration of independence? That is purely legislative. 

This isn't about taking bribes, corruption, ... This is about actions they did in execution of a Parliament, a legislative body. If they would not have followed it, they would have broken the Catalan legislation. I really think you cannot compare real criminal acts with political actions on the 'orders' of a democratic chosen Parliament. 

And I personally think it is archaic to prosecute people because of "rebellion". I think you can prosecute people if they use violent means to achieve their political goals because of their violent means. But using democratic measures to achieve those goals? Prosecution is in my eyes (and in some European Court of Human Right's (ECHR) cases) in violation with the human rights. 

2 hours ago, Mentat said:

Prosecuting Puigdemont is a terrible idea, and will help no one, but the problem is that, despite what some might say, Spain does have a reasonably independent judiciary (as is evident by the many cases of corruption that prosecutors and judges have been hammering the ruling party with for the last decade) which is not under control of the government (otherwise the government would probably delay the whole thing, if only because the timing is awful if they mean to do well in the regional elections in December).

This is all on what I heard so I cannot say this is true but I heard several judges were actually nominated by the PP. Can you really call them impartial? Anyway, this will probably be argument put before the Belgian judge deciding over the EAW and maybe even by the ECHR if they go with the case before the ECHR (which in my eyes they should try).

But it is indeed not smart to prosecute him or his ministers. Rajoy is only making them into a martyrs and making the independentist movement even bigger. But they aren't even the only ones the Spanish government has been prosecuting. I think the list is a lot bigger. 

Quote

If you have more specific questions about Spanish law I can try to help, though Criminal law is not my area of expertise.

Thanks. Belgian Criminal Law was my speciality during my law school. The only Spanish law I ever had was in relation the product liability (and EU law). 

[Mentat]

11 hours ago, Tijgy said:

I know that mostly the government is being prosecuted but I also heard the president of the Parliament is being prosecuted? I might be wrong but I thought it was because she did allow the vote for the declaration of independence? That is purely legislative. 

This isn't about taking bribes, corruption, ... This is about actions they did in execution of a Parliament, a legislative body. If they would not have followed it, they would have broken the Catalan legislation. I really think you cannot compare real criminal acts with political actions on the 'orders' of a democratic chosen Parliament. 

And I personally think it is archaic to prosecute people because of "rebellion". I think you can prosecute people if they use violent means to achieve their political goals because of their violent means. But using democratic measures to achieve those goals? Prosecution is in my eyes (and in some European Court of Human Right's (ECHR) cases) in violation with the human rights. 

This is all on what I heard so I cannot say this is true but I heard several judges were actually nominated by the PP. Can you really call them impartial? Anyway, this will probably be argument put before the Belgian judge deciding over the EAW and maybe even by the ECHR if they go with the case before the ECHR (which in my eyes they should try).

But it is indeed not smart to prosecute him or his ministers. Rajoy is only making them into a martyrs and making the independentist movement even bigger. But they aren't even the only ones the Spanish government has been prosecuting. I think the list is a lot bigger. 

Thanks. Belgian Criminal Law was my speciality during my law school. The only Spanish law I ever had was in relation the product liability (and EU law). 

I don't think Carme Forcadell (the president of the Catalan parliament) is being prosecuted right now (she's being investigated), but she could be very shortly (she will be giving a statement before the magistrate at some point today). She is, indeed, part of the legislative.

There is no Catalan criminal legislation; all criminal legislation is Spanish. Also, much of the legislation you refer to had been declared unconstitutional by the Spanish Constitutional Court, and its validity had been suspended.

I agree the crimes of rebellion and sedition seem archaic. What is more, as they're written in the Spanish criminal code, I really don't think any of the members of the Catalan parliament are guilty of either of them (as they require some element of violence). As European citizens, they can appeal to the ECHR (and almost certainly will, if the case doesn't go their way).

The short answer is that the government doesn't nominate judges. The long answer is pretty long, but here goes:

The Spanish Constitutional Court is a mostly political body. Of its 12 members, 2 are nominated directly by the government, 8 are nominated by the 2 houses of parliament (4 each) by a 3/5ths qualified majority (which no single arty can usually muster) and the remaining 2 are nominated by the General Judiciary Council (a governing body for judges and magistrates, which is also mostly political). Nominees must have a legal background (judges, lawyers, etc.), more than 15 years experience and renown in their field. That said, the Constitutional Court judges laws and regulations, never people. It isn't truly part of the judiciary (though it has the same guarantees of independence), and is often referred to as the 'negative legislator' or 'third house of parliament'. Though the political nature of the Constitutional Court is unquestionable, it bears saying it has often ruled against the government and in favor of the regions (and in important cases too).

Judges and Magistrates are people who have a degree in law and that have passed an extremely demanding public exam (studying for it is almost like getting a second degree). Once you're a judge, you can become a magistrate through seniority or through passing yet another public exam. Judges and magistrates are independent of the government, and certainly not named by them. They have legal guarantees of their impartiality and independence. Of course, this doesn't mean they don't have biases, political sympathies, or that they don't occasionally make wrong or stupid decisions. They're just independent of the government.

I think it would be desirable to end the excessive political nature of both the Constitutional Court and the General Judiciary Council, but despite this, the judiciary in Spain is reasonably impartial and independent (and considered as such by most all international bodies that look into this kind of thing, like the UN or the Venice Commission).

I agree prosecuting the Catalan government is neither particularly smart nor particularly fair, but as I said, this is not up to Rajoy (in fact, if it was he'd probably at least delay the whole thing until after the regional elections, for very obvious political reasons).

[Tijgy]

The "official" apology of the Belgian federal government to the Rajoy

https://www.canvas.be/video/genre/nieuws/nieuwsmagazine/charles-michel-telefoneert-spaanse-premier-rajoy

A part of it is in Spanish but it is mostly in Dutch. If someone wants, I am prepared to translate the subtitles. 

 

[Meera of Tarth]

6 hours ago, Mentat said:

I don't think Carme Forcadell (the president of the Catalan parliament) is being prosecuted right now (she's being investigated), but she could be very shortly (she will be giving a statement before the magistrate at some point today). She is, indeed, part of the legislative.

She has a week to prepare and go to court again to face either freedom until trial or prison until trial like the Government. At this moment they are under control (being able to be contacted by phone, etc). All the Bureau Members have these days and will face trials IIRC.

[Meera of Tarth]

6 hours ago, Mentat said:

That said, the Constitutional Court judges laws and regulations, never people. It isn't truly part of the judiciary (though it has the same guarantees of independence), and is often referred to as the 'negative legislator' or 'third house of parliament'. Though the political nature of the Constitutional Court is unquestionable, it bears saying it has often ruled against the government and in favor of the regions (and in important cases too).

What? In favour of the regions? Against the Spanish Government?

Maybe Catalonia is the exception then, LOL.

[Meera of Tarth]

2 hours ago, Tijgy said:

The "official" apology of the Belgian federal government to the Rajoy

https://www.canvas.be/video/genre/nieuws/nieuwsmagazine/charles-michel-telefoneert-spaanse-premier-rajoy

A part of it is in Spanish but it is mostly in Dutch. If someone wants, I am prepared to translate the subtitles. 

 

I'd be interested if you can. What I read is that the PM of Belgium has asked all the parties of the Government to remain silent about the topic of Catalonia.

[Tijgy]

11 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I'd be interested if you can. What I read is that the PM of Belgium has asked all the parties of the Government to remain silent about the topic of Catalonia.

Then he should say this to the own ministers of his own ministers because one of them did say anything - or at least said that the Flemish Minister-President has no right to say anything about a sovereign state. Something that can indeed be discussed. But then I can also say she doesn't have any right to say what our Flemish Minister-President should do. 

(About the clip - it is actually a fake apology made for a Flemish satirical televisionprogram. It is just funny because it goes completely wrong due language issues )

Translation: 

Spoiler

Rajoy: Hello, with Mariano Rajoy (Spanish)

Charles Michel - Francophone Liberal Premier of Belgium: Hello, senor Rajoy (Spanish)

Rajoy: Hello. Who am I speaking? (Spanish)

Michel: It is Charles Michel of Belgium. "Carlos Miguel" I would like to apologize... (French)

Rajoy: Say it in Spanish (Spanish)

Michel: Ola, I don't speak Spanish. (Dutch) "English?" (English)

Rajoy: If you don't say it in Spanish, I am not interested (Spanish)

Michel: Does anyone speak here Spanish? Spanish? (Dutch)

Kris Peeters - Flemish christen-democrat, Belgian Minister of Work and Economy: I know some Spanish, colleagues, just let me now (Dutch)

K. Peeters: Where is the bus stop? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What? (Spanish)

Michel: Kris, that tourists Spanish doesn't help. (Dutch)

Peeters: For me, sandwich with ham, please? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What? Ham? (Spanish)

Michel: Kris, shut up! Come on, someone here should be able to speak Spanish? (Dutch)

Jan Jambon - Flemish nationalist/conservative, Belgian Minister of Interior: "Hello, with Jan Jambon, How can I help you? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What, Jamon*? Laugh with someone else? (Spanish)

*Jamon means ham in Spanish; and Jambon is the French word  Very old joke

Michel: What does he say? (Dutch)

Jambon: I don't know. I speak Spanish. I don't say I can understand it. (Dutch)

Michel: Can you at least say how you say "pardon" in Spanish? (Dutch)

Jambon: "Paarden"* No problem "caballos". That is easy (Dutch)

Paarden is the Dutch word for horses

Michel: "Caballos, senor Rajoy, caballos muchos"

Rajoy: "What? Horses? (Spanish).

Peeters: "Caballos". I knew that word too (Dutch)

Rajoy: Why are you talking the whole time about ham and horses? Is this a joke? (Spanish)

Michel: Ola, "Il est faché"* How do you say that? (Dutch/French)

*He is angry in French  

Jambon: Wait ... you are ... "Eres"? (Dutch)

Michel: "Eres facista?" 

Rajoy: Facist? How dare you? It isn't because you let once some people beaten that you are a facist? (Spanish)

Peeters: Can I pay here with my bank card? (Spanish)

Michel: Peeters, shut up. This is becoming here a diplomatic disaster (Dutch)

Jambon: Francken is here. He is able to speak Spanish very good (Dutch)

Michel: Theo, can you offer your apologies in the name of the government to the Spanish Premier? (Dutch)

Theo Francken - Flemish nationalist/conservative, person responsible for the diplomatic riot between Spain and Belgium, State Secretary for Asylum and Immigration: Hello, mister Rajoy "El gobierno Belga apoya a todo el gobierno Catalan"

Rajoy: "Bastardos. Como te atreves? Tienes algun respecto?"

Michel: What did you say? (Dutch)

Francken: That we support the Catalan government for 100 % (Dutch)

Michel: "Mais enfin", Theo. "Caballos, caballos, caballos, senor Rajoy. 

Rajoy: "Horses, horses, horses. Kiss my ****, horses" (Spanish)

Michel: Oef, he also said "caballos". He realized he was wrong too, luckily. (Dutch)

Peeters: "Long live the diplomacy, or in Spanish of course (Dutch): I have a burning feeling while peeing

The Belgian government seriously need to hire a Spanish interlocutor   

 

[Mentat]

4 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

What? In favour of the regions? Against the Spanish Government?

Maybe Catalonia is the exception then, LOL.

It really isn't. We can look at the judgment against the Catalan Statute of Autonomy (which I agree is an unfortunate judgment) or the recent judgments on the independence procedure (though I'd argue that the Catalan government was purposefully and knowingly violating the Constitution because it considered it had a mandate of the Catalan people to do so, so these judgments aren't at all surprising) and think so, but if we bother to look back at all, we can find plenty of occasions in which, as I said, the Constitutional Court has ruled in favor of the regions (including Catalonia) and against the government. One of the most important judgments of the Constitutional Court (from a legal point of view) is this one, which is a good example.

[Tijgy]

Interview of Puigdemont on the Francophone (Belgian) television: 

https://www.rtbf.be/info/dossier/referendum-en-catalogne/detail_carles-puigdemont-je-suis-dispose-a-etre-candidat-aux-elections-meme-depuis-bruxelles?id=9753953

In French

[Tijgy]

And the Belgian federal prosecutor received the Spanish EAW and will look at it tomorrow - poor guy, he has to work in the weekend 

[Meera of Tarth]

1 hour ago, Tijgy said:

And the Belgian federal prosecutor received the Spanish EAW and will look at it tomorrow - poor guy, he has to work in the weekend 

apparently they will denounce bad treatment during the road to prison in the vans. They wanted them to get sick of something.

[Meera of Tarth]

I don't want to generalise, but this is a group of professional National Spanish policemen laughing at what a bad trip Junqueras (exVicepresident) they suppose he would have (high speed) -and indeed he end up having this kind of trip-until he arrived to the prison which was one hour in a van. Then they go on with sexual references about bears in prison related to him.

Spanish Ministry is investigating this.....

[Meera of Tarth]

3 hours ago, Mentat said:

It really isn't. We can look at the judgment against the Catalan Statute of Autonomy (which I agree is an unfortunate judgment) or the recent judgments on the independence procedure (though I'd argue that the Catalan government was purposefully and knowingly violating the Constitution because it considered it had a mandate of the Catalan people to do so, so these judgments aren't at all surprising) and think so, but if we bother to look back at all, we can find plenty of occasions in which, as I said, the Constitutional Court has ruled in favor of the regions (including Catalonia) and against the government. One of the most important judgments of the Constitutional Court (from a legal point of view) is this one, which is a good example.

The Statute is the biggest of the things. It had been approved in the Spanish Parliament. They were told by PP to analyse it after, it's so sad

Yeah, it's possible, not all the things they say are gonna be biased, but the way the CC has been used as a tool by the SPGovernment against any legislation made by the Catalan Gov. are big examples of how today is difficult to view it as not biased. Political problems are not resolved this way, and indeed, the thing has escalaed more, as a result of that.

@Tijgy @Mentat I dound an interesting article on the "rebellion" charges and others (and possible irregularities and other charges that should be faced instead), you have a Law background so maybe  you will find it interesting

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eldiario.es%2Fescolar%2Fprimer-acto-campana-electoral_6_703839636.html%3Futm_content%3Dbuffere6903%26utm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dtwitter.com%26utm_campaign%3Dbuffer

Spoiler

The first act of the electoral campaign

That half exgovern sleeps today in prison is an abusive and disproportionate response: a criminal solution to a political problem that will not be fixed in this way. But this criminal martyrdom does not give the independence leaders the reason.

Ignacio Escolar 

r

When the Generalitat put the ballot boxes on October 1 against the express mandate of the Constitutional Court, when the Parliament proclaimed the Republic of Catalonia with that illegal referendum as an excuse, it is clear that the Govern failed to comply with the law. It is also obvious that skipping the law and court orders has criminal consequences in any democratic country, and there are several crimes that could rightly be imputed to them. The one of serious disobedience to the authority: of six months to a year of fine. Or the prevarication: three to eight months of fine and up to 15 years of disqualification. Or the embezzlement: up to eight years in prison, if the use of public funds to organize the illegal referendum is demonstrated.

They are all serious crimes and that justice must investigate and punish. They are serious enough that it was not necessary to force the hand and apply a criminal law of authorship, of excessive forcefulness and of doubtful legal reserve. Rebellion without violence? It's like a homicide without a victim: an oxymoron. It is a tough criminal hand that only gives arguments to those who want to portray Spanish democracy as an authoritarian state, as a country incapable of giving political solution to political problems. Like Western Turkey.

Spain is not Turkey nor Rajoy is Erdogan. The separatists in Turkey - the Kurds - are not subject to the Criminal Code: they are bombarded. The Government has closed more than a hundred media, has imprisoned hundreds of journalists, judges, prosecutors, teachers, police ... But that Spain has not reached the repression of Turkey does not mean that the Government and the Office of the Prosecutor under his orders are not forcing the channels of justice and the rule of law to the limits that any Democrat -independentist or not- should criticize.

There is a fundamental right that must protect everyone, including those who ignore the law: the right to the natural judge. It is included in the Declaration of Human Rights and also in our Constitution. It is the right of any defendant to judge the judge that he or she is required by law, not the one that suits the government or the prosecutor. It is a right that in this case is being violated because the judge that falls under the law to the imputed independentistas is not the Supreme Court for the graduates - it would be the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia - nor is it the National Court.

DOCUMENT: Fragment of the order of the plenary session of the National Audience of 2008 on the investigation of the Garzón Francoism.

 

"The crime of rebellion has never been the competence of this National Court." I do not say it. He said it in 2008 - in writing, in a car - the very plenary session of the Criminal Chamber of the National Court. Almost a score of magistrates and also the prosecutor reached that conclusion when Baltasar Garzón tried to investigate the crimes of the Franco regime. It is the same thing that also affirmed the Supreme Court, when it accepted the complaint against Garzón in a writ where it is said that the crime of rebellion "has never been part of the crimes against the form of government (...) so it is absolutely unjustified conclusively conclude that the National Court has competence for its investigation ".

DOCUMENT: Fragment of the Supreme Court's order of admission of the complaint against Baltasar Garzón.

 

The National Court has never been the court that judged the rebellion, as the Attorney General of the State, José Manuel Maza, knows better than anyone: he participated, as magistrate of the Supreme Court, in that criminal case against Garzón. The argument used by the Office of the Prosecutor in its complaint to take this case to the National Court is so convoluted that it has taken nine pages to attribute the jurisdiction to this court, something that is usually dealt with in a paragraph or two.

The competence of the Supreme Court in the case of the categorized ones is also questionable.The normal thing would have been for the Catalan TSJ to be occupied, and not the Supreme Court. It is what always happens with the regional autonomies when they are imputed. The argument that the Prosecutor's Office - that the consequences of crime transcend the Catalan territory - is also unprecedented because there are many other serious crimes whose consequences transcend the provincial limits and never before a similar criterion was applied.

Why does the State Attorney General prefer the National Court to the Provincial Court of Barcelona? Why do you prefer the judges of the Supreme Court before those of the Catalan TSJ?The answer seems obvious and the orders of preventive detention give him fully the reason: because he thinks they will be tougher with the independentistas. Because both courts are much more politically controlled. Because they believe that judges who do not live in Catalonia will be less sympathetic to the accused. Because the social pressure in Spain, the "a for them", plays in their favor.

The very different responses given by the Supreme Court and the National Court to quasi-identical complaints demonstrate to what extent the interpretation of the same Penal Code can change. The Supreme Court has reduced the imputed crimes a couple of degrees immediately after arriving.Meanwhile, the National Court has put 7 exconsellers and former vice president Oriol Junqueras in prison.

The decision of Carles Puigdemont and the rest of the Govern in exile to take refuge in Belgium is politically very questionable. How can Catalan officials be asked to resist 155 while one escapes to Brussels? Disobedience to the laws as a form of struggle - both legitimate and effective in many cases, from the insubordination to the military to the protests of the PAH - has always been questionable in the Catalan procés . For one reason: because those who have disobeyed the laws, the Parliament and the Catalan Government, were also those who enacted laws and were responsible for enforcing them. But disobedience to the laws, as a strategy of civil resistance, also implies accepting the consequences of that insubordination to expose the irrationality and the disproportion of that response. That is not what the exgovern has chosen.

Refuge in Belgium while others assume the consequences of your actions politically does not have a pass. Legally, it is something else. It's probably the best they could do.

The flight to Belgium of Carles Puigdemont and the other four exconsellers will force a Belgian judge to decide on the crimes imputed to the expresident. About the penalties and the tests. On the competence of the courts that accuse them. On whether to accept extradition.

That Oriol Junqueras and half govern sleep in prison today is a disproportionate response: a criminal solution to a political problem, which with repression and jail can only be aggravated.But this criminal martyrdom does not give the independence leaders the reason. Except when they report being victims of judicial abuse.

The disproportionate response from the Office of the Prosecutor and the National Court does not change the main conclusion: it was an undemocratic outrage to declare the independence of Catalonia unilaterally with the argument of an illegal referendum in which only 43% of the population participated.

In his last press conference from Brussels, on Tuesday, Carles Puigdemont argued that "he was only fulfilling his electoral program." The expresident should know that the majority of Catalans who did not vote for him also have rights. That an electoral program is not above the Autonomy Statute or the Constitution. That its majority was more than enough to govern Catalonia, but not to initiate a unilateral rupture process where not even half of its own population followed.

The prison orders dictated by Judge Carmen Lamela are the first act of an election campaign that starts badly. What will happen if the same result is repeated or if the independents win by an even greater margin? What will the Government do if this is what the Catalans vote?

The National Court has an answer. An answer that, without being Turkey, is dangerously close to what Erdogan would like.

 

[Meera of Tarth]

6 hours ago, Tijgy said:

Interview of Puigdemont on the Francophone (Belgian) television: 

https://www.rtbf.be/info/dossier/referendum-en-catalogne/detail_carles-puigdemont-je-suis-dispose-a-etre-candidat-aux-elections-meme-depuis-bruxelles?id=9753953

In French

It’s intersting what he says about not being able to have normal elections in this environment with a Government imprisoned, and what he says later in the last minutes of the interview about the whole story of the process, that goes years back in time so as to be understood.

And when he says that there  is a whole difference between what the press says and what the politicnas say (referring to the EU). And well, that he is not here to interfere with Belgian politics, bc this would be a nightmare for your Government

[Meera of Tarth]

12 hours ago, Tijgy said:

Then he should say this to the own ministers of his own ministers because one of them did say anything - or at least said that the Flemish Minister-President has no right to say anything about a sovereign state. Something that can indeed be discussed. But then I can also say she doesn't have any right to say what our Flemish Minister-President should do. 

(About the clip - it is actually a fake apology made for a Flemish satirical televisionprogram. It is just funny because it goes completely wrong due language issues )

Translation: 

  Hide contents

Rajoy: Hello, with Mariano Rajoy (Spanish)

Charles Michel - Francophone Liberal Premier of Belgium: Hello, senor Rajoy (Spanish)

Rajoy: Hello. Who am I speaking? (Spanish)

Michel: It is Charles Michel of Belgium. "Carlos Miguel" I would like to apologize... (French)

Rajoy: Say it in Spanish (Spanish)

Michel: Ola, I don't speak Spanish. (Dutch) "English?" (English)

Rajoy: If you don't say it in Spanish, I am not interested (Spanish)

Michel: Does anyone speak here Spanish? Spanish? (Dutch)

Kris Peeters - Flemish christen-democrat, Belgian Minister of Work and Economy: I know some Spanish, colleagues, just let me now (Dutch)

K. Peeters: Where is the bus stop? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What? (Spanish)

Michel: Kris, that tourists Spanish doesn't help. (Dutch)

Peeters: For me, sandwich with ham, please? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What? Ham? (Spanish)

Michel: Kris, shut up! Come on, someone here should be able to speak Spanish? (Dutch)

Jan Jambon - Flemish nationalist/conservative, Belgian Minister of Interior: "Hello, with Jan Jambon, How can I help you? (Spanish)

Rajoy: What, Jamon*? Laugh with someone else? (Spanish)

*Jamon means ham in Spanish; and Jambon is the French word  Very old joke

Michel: What does he say? (Dutch)

Jambon: I don't know. I speak Spanish. I don't say I can understand it. (Dutch)

Michel: Can you at least say how you say "pardon" in Spanish? (Dutch)

Jambon: "Paarden"* No problem "caballos". That is easy (Dutch)

Paarden is the Dutch word for horses

Michel: "Caballos, senor Rajoy, caballos muchos"

Rajoy: "What? Horses? (Spanish).

Peeters: "Caballos". I knew that word too (Dutch)

Rajoy: Why are you talking the whole time about ham and horses? Is this a joke? (Spanish)

Michel: Ola, "Il est faché"* How do you say that? (Dutch/French)

*He is angry in French  

Jambon: Wait ... you are ... "Eres"? (Dutch)

Michel: "Eres facista?" 

Rajoy: Facist? How dare you? It isn't because you let once some people beaten that you are a facist? (Spanish)

Peeters: Can I pay here with my bank card? (Spanish)

Michel: Peeters, shut up. This is becoming here a diplomatic disaster (Dutch)

Jambon: Francken is here. He is able to speak Spanish very good (Dutch)

Michel: Theo, can you offer your apologies in the name of the government to the Spanish Premier? (Dutch)

Theo Francken - Flemish nationalist/conservative, person responsible for the diplomatic riot between Spain and Belgium, State Secretary for Asylum and Immigration: Hello, mister Rajoy "El gobierno Belga apoya a todo el gobierno Catalan"

Rajoy: "Bastardos. Como te atreves? Tienes algun respecto?"

Michel: What did you say? (Dutch)

Francken: That we support the Catalan government for 100 % (Dutch)

Michel: "Mais enfin", Theo. "Caballos, caballos, caballos, senor Rajoy. 

Rajoy: "Horses, horses, horses. Kiss my ****, horses" (Spanish)

Michel: Oef, he also said "caballos". He realized he was wrong too, luckily. (Dutch)

Peeters: "Long live the diplomacy, or in Spanish of course (Dutch): I have a burning feeling while peeing

The Belgian government seriously need to hire a Spanish interlocutor   

 

Thank you so much!

With the translation this is even better!
It's hilarious!!!! hahahahaha

My belly hurts of laughing

[Tijgy]

10 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Thank you so much!

 

Your welcome. It is one huge language joke  

The spokesman of the Belgian Federal Parket announced they will calmly look at the EAW and decide who is competent. LOL, they are completely uninterested by the fact they have to get involved in the arrest of five Catalan politicians. They are probably annoyed this is interfering with their real important investigations like the the terror attacks in Brussels and Paris.

Welcome to the Belgian justice system ! 

And Serbia is now asking an international conference regarding Kosovo: if Madrid can act in a certain way against the unilateral declaration of independence of a region, Serbia has the same right. Great 

[Mentat]

15 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I don't want to generalise, but this is a group of professional National Spanish policemen laughing at what a bad trip Junqueras (exVicepresident) they suppose he would have (high speed) -and indeed he end up having this kind of trip-until he arrived to the prison which was one hour in a van. Then they go on with sexual references about bears in prison related to him.

Spanish Ministry is investigating this.....

I heard this on the Catalan radio. It's absolutely disgusting and beyond-the-pale unprofessional. Hopefully it will be looked into.

15 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

The Statute is the biggest of the things. It had been approved in the Spanish Parliament. They were told by PP to analyse it after, it's so sad

Yeah, it's possible, not all the things they say are gonna be biased, but the way the CC has been used as a tool by the SPGovernment against any legislation made by the Catalan Gov. are big examples of how today is difficult to view it as not biased. Political problems are not resolved this way, and indeed, the thing has escalaed more, as a result of that.

@Tijgy @Mentat I dound an interesting article on the "rebellion" charges and others (and possible irregularities and other charges that should be faced instead), you have a Law background so maybe  you will find it interesting

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eldiario.es%2Fescolar%2Fprimer-acto-campana-electoral_6_703839636.html%3Futm_content%3Dbuffere6903%26utm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dtwitter.com%26utm_campaign%3Dbuffer

  Reveal hidden contents

The first act of the electoral campaign

That half exgovern sleeps today in prison is an abusive and disproportionate response: a criminal solution to a political problem that will not be fixed in this way. But this criminal martyrdom does not give the independence leaders the reason.

Ignacio Escolar 

r

When the Generalitat put the ballot boxes on October 1 against the express mandate of the Constitutional Court, when the Parliament proclaimed the Republic of Catalonia with that illegal referendum as an excuse, it is clear that the Govern failed to comply with the law. It is also obvious that skipping the law and court orders has criminal consequences in any democratic country, and there are several crimes that could rightly be imputed to them. The one of serious disobedience to the authority: of six months to a year of fine. Or the prevarication: three to eight months of fine and up to 15 years of disqualification. Or the embezzlement: up to eight years in prison, if the use of public funds to organize the illegal referendum is demonstrated.

They are all serious crimes and that justice must investigate and punish. They are serious enough that it was not necessary to force the hand and apply a criminal law of authorship, of excessive forcefulness and of doubtful legal reserve. Rebellion without violence? It's like a homicide without a victim: an oxymoron. It is a tough criminal hand that only gives arguments to those who want to portray Spanish democracy as an authoritarian state, as a country incapable of giving political solution to political problems. Like Western Turkey.

Spain is not Turkey nor Rajoy is Erdogan. The separatists in Turkey - the Kurds - are not subject to the Criminal Code: they are bombarded. The Government has closed more than a hundred media, has imprisoned hundreds of journalists, judges, prosecutors, teachers, police ... But that Spain has not reached the repression of Turkey does not mean that the Government and the Office of the Prosecutor under his orders are not forcing the channels of justice and the rule of law to the limits that any Democrat -independentist or not- should criticize.

There is a fundamental right that must protect everyone, including those who ignore the law: the right to the natural judge. It is included in the Declaration of Human Rights and also in our Constitution. It is the right of any defendant to judge the judge that he or she is required by law, not the one that suits the government or the prosecutor. It is a right that in this case is being violated because the judge that falls under the law to the imputed independentistas is not the Supreme Court for the graduates - it would be the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia - nor is it the National Court.

DOCUMENT: Fragment of the order of the plenary session of the National Audience of 2008 on the investigation of the Garzón Francoism.

 

"The crime of rebellion has never been the competence of this National Court." I do not say it. He said it in 2008 - in writing, in a car - the very plenary session of the Criminal Chamber of the National Court. Almost a score of magistrates and also the prosecutor reached that conclusion when Baltasar Garzón tried to investigate the crimes of the Franco regime. It is the same thing that also affirmed the Supreme Court, when it accepted the complaint against Garzón in a writ where it is said that the crime of rebellion "has never been part of the crimes against the form of government (...) so it is absolutely unjustified conclusively conclude that the National Court has competence for its investigation ".

DOCUMENT: Fragment of the Supreme Court's order of admission of the complaint against Baltasar Garzón.

 

The National Court has never been the court that judged the rebellion, as the Attorney General of the State, José Manuel Maza, knows better than anyone: he participated, as magistrate of the Supreme Court, in that criminal case against Garzón. The argument used by the Office of the Prosecutor in its complaint to take this case to the National Court is so convoluted that it has taken nine pages to attribute the jurisdiction to this court, something that is usually dealt with in a paragraph or two.

The competence of the Supreme Court in the case of the categorized ones is also questionable.The normal thing would have been for the Catalan TSJ to be occupied, and not the Supreme Court. It is what always happens with the regional autonomies when they are imputed. The argument that the Prosecutor's Office - that the consequences of crime transcend the Catalan territory - is also unprecedented because there are many other serious crimes whose consequences transcend the provincial limits and never before a similar criterion was applied.

Why does the State Attorney General prefer the National Court to the Provincial Court of Barcelona? Why do you prefer the judges of the Supreme Court before those of the Catalan TSJ?The answer seems obvious and the orders of preventive detention give him fully the reason: because he thinks they will be tougher with the independentistas. Because both courts are much more politically controlled. Because they believe that judges who do not live in Catalonia will be less sympathetic to the accused. Because the social pressure in Spain, the "a for them", plays in their favor.

The very different responses given by the Supreme Court and the National Court to quasi-identical complaints demonstrate to what extent the interpretation of the same Penal Code can change. The Supreme Court has reduced the imputed crimes a couple of degrees immediately after arriving.Meanwhile, the National Court has put 7 exconsellers and former vice president Oriol Junqueras in prison.

The decision of Carles Puigdemont and the rest of the Govern in exile to take refuge in Belgium is politically very questionable. How can Catalan officials be asked to resist 155 while one escapes to Brussels? Disobedience to the laws as a form of struggle - both legitimate and effective in many cases, from the insubordination to the military to the protests of the PAH - has always been questionable in the Catalan procés . For one reason: because those who have disobeyed the laws, the Parliament and the Catalan Government, were also those who enacted laws and were responsible for enforcing them. But disobedience to the laws, as a strategy of civil resistance, also implies accepting the consequences of that insubordination to expose the irrationality and the disproportion of that response. That is not what the exgovern has chosen.

Refuge in Belgium while others assume the consequences of your actions politically does not have a pass. Legally, it is something else. It's probably the best they could do.

The flight to Belgium of Carles Puigdemont and the other four exconsellers will force a Belgian judge to decide on the crimes imputed to the expresident. About the penalties and the tests. On the competence of the courts that accuse them. On whether to accept extradition.

That Oriol Junqueras and half govern sleep in prison today is a disproportionate response: a criminal solution to a political problem, which with repression and jail can only be aggravated.But this criminal martyrdom does not give the independence leaders the reason. Except when they report being victims of judicial abuse.

The disproportionate response from the Office of the Prosecutor and the National Court does not change the main conclusion: it was an undemocratic outrage to declare the independence of Catalonia unilaterally with the argument of an illegal referendum in which only 43% of the population participated.

In his last press conference from Brussels, on Tuesday, Carles Puigdemont argued that "he was only fulfilling his electoral program." The expresident should know that the majority of Catalans who did not vote for him also have rights. That an electoral program is not above the Autonomy Statute or the Constitution. That its majority was more than enough to govern Catalonia, but not to initiate a unilateral rupture process where not even half of its own population followed.

The prison orders dictated by Judge Carmen Lamela are the first act of an election campaign that starts badly. What will happen if the same result is repeated or if the independents win by an even greater margin? What will the Government do if this is what the Catalans vote?

The National Court has an answer. An answer that, without being Turkey, is dangerously close to what Erdogan would like.

 

Agreed on all accounts. I read that article you linked and I found it very interesting. I think it's very true that Spanish courts are over-reaching and doing themselves, Spain, Catalonia and the rule of law they are supposed to uphold a disservice. A longer prosecution without preemptive prison based on lesser but more accurate charges (like disobedience or prevarication) and ending in a prison sentence that was less than 2 years (and as such would not be served for a first offender) and a prohibition from holding public office for a number of years would be much more proportionate and effective and far less politically damaging for Spain.

[Meera of Tarth]

2 hours ago, Tijgy said:

Your welcome. It is one huge language joke  

The spokesman of the Belgian Federal Parket announced they will calmly look at the EAW and decide who is competent. LOL, they are completely uninterested by the fact they have to get involved in the arrest of five Catalan politicians. They are probably annoyed this is interfering with their real important investigations like the the terror attacks in Brussels and Paris.

Welcome to the Belgian justice system ! 

And Serbia is now asking an international conference regarding Kosovo: if Madrid can act in a certain way against the unilateral declaration of independence of a region, Serbia has the same right. Great 

I think this is what they should be focusing on, instead of having thousands of policemen in a Wanrner ship prepared to do "whatever is necessary" to preserve the territory. That's also a concern for an hypothetic independence of Catalonia.

Security should be the main focus by everyone.

Spain can't reconise Kosovo.

[Tijgy]

2 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I think this is what they should be focusing on, instead of having thousands of policemen in a Wanrner ship prepared to do "whatever is necessary" to preserve the territory. That's also a concern for an hypothetic independence of Catalonia.

 

And the federal prosecutor delegated the EAW to the prosecutors in Brussels.

https://t.co/QSqJ0pqbQS

Quote

 

Le parquet fédéral a transmis ce samedi après-midi les cinq mandats d’arrêts européens contre le président catalan destitué Puigdemont et les quatre autres membres du gouvernement restés en Belgique au parquet de Bruxelles, a annoncé le substitut du procureur du roi de Bruxelles dans un communiqué

Les deux parquets examinent désormais ces mandats afin d’« initier la procédure judiciaire dans le respect des législations et dans les meilleurs délais ». Le parquet de Bruxelles communiquera davantage sur les suites du dossier ce dimanche à 14h.