Key Elements of the Case

Home , Artur Mas, Carles Puigdemont, Dolors Bassa, Joan Josep Nuet, Joaquim Forn, Josep Rull

KEY ELEMENTS OF THE CASE

I. THE ALLEGED CRIMES

In the coming months the judges of the Spanish Supreme Court will have to decide whether the prosecution has been able to proof the existence of three charges brought against the defendants.

REBELLION

The crime of rebellion, one of the most serious in the Spanish Criminal Code, involves a “violent and public uprising“ and is punishable by imprisonment for up to 25 years. The only precedent for the crime of rebellion in modern Spain was the attempted coup d’état by Lieutenant-Colonel Tejero on 23rd February 1981, when armed forces stormed the Parliament and tanks were deployed in the streets.

Article 472 Criminal Code*

A conviction for the offence of rebellion shall be handed down to those who violently and publicly rise up for any of the following purposes:

1. To fully or partially repeal, suspend or amend the Constitution;

5. To declare the independence of any part of the national territory

7. To disaffect from obedience to the Government any armed force.

* Excerpt of the part of the article relevant to this case.

SEDITION

Contrary to the position of the State’s Prosecutor Office, the Attorney General’s Office is charging some of the defendants with the crime of sedition, which involves a ‘public and tumultuous uprising’ and carries penalties of up to 15 years in prison

Article 544 Penal Code

Conviction for sedition shall befall those who, without being included in the felony of rebellion, public and tumultuously rise up to prevent, by force or outside the legal channels, application of the laws, or any authority, official corporation or public officer from lawful exercise of the duties thereof or implementation of the resolutions thereof, or of administrative or judicial resolutions.

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

This offence was introduced to prosecute the activities of groups associated to commit serious illegal acts (e.g. terrorism or drug trafficking). The offense of criminal conspiracy exists from the very moment when there is a collaboration or participation in the criminal entity, regardless of whether this is able to execute the intended illegal acts.

Article 570 bis Criminal Code

Whoever promotes, constitutes, organises, co-ordinates or directs a criminal organisation shall be punished with a sentence of imprisonment from four to eight years, if it has the purpose or object of committing serious felonies (...).

For the purposes of this Code, a criminal organisation is construed to be a stable group formed by one or more persons, for an indefinite term, in collusion and co-ordination to distribute diverse tasks or duties in order to commit felonies, as well as to carry out reiterated commission of misdemeanours.

DISOBEDIENCE

Charges of disobedience have been used in the Catalan context in recent years. In March 2017, former President Artur Mas and two of his Ministers were convicted of a crime of disobedience for their role in the non-binding referendum of 2014.

Article 410 Criminal Code*

1.Authorities or civil servants who openly refuse to duly fulfil court resolutions, decisions or orders of a higher authority, handed down within the scope of their respective powers and complying with the legal formalities, shall be punished with a fine from three to twelve months and special barring from public employment and office.

* Excerpt of the part of the article relevant to this case.

EMBEZZLEMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS

This crime is committed when those who have powers to administer public funds use them for private purposes, adversely affecting the assets managed.

Article 432 Penal Code*

1.The authority or public officer who, for profit, steals or allows a third party, with the same intention, to steal public funds or property he has under his charge due to his duties, shall incur a sentence of imprisonment from three to six years and absolute barring for a term from six to ten years.

* Excerpt of the part of the article relevant to this case. 2

II. THE PROSECUTION

Three parties lead the prosecution against the defendants:

STATE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE

Led by the Chief State Prosecutor, appointed by the Government. As the primary institution charged with defending the law, it is the leading party in this trial. The previous State Prosecutor charged the defendants with rebellion, a charge that has not been altered by the changes of Prosecutor and Government.

ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE

The State Attorney General is appointed by the Council of Ministers, depends on the Ministry of Justice and represents the State at the trial. The Attorney General’s Office has not contested the key arguments of the case built by the prosecution although it charges the defendants with sedition and not rebellion.

PEOPLE’S PROSECUTION (VOX)

The Spanish Constitution recognises the right of citizens to stand in a trial regardless of their involvement in the events judged. In this case, there is one private prosecutor, the far-right organisation Vox, which asks for the harshest penalties for the defendants, adding criminal conspiracy to the charges of rebellion.

III. THE DEFENDANTS

The prosecution targets key figures of the Catalan executive and legislative powers, as well as civil society organisations. Nine of the defendants have spent over a year in pre-trial detention: six members of the Catalan Government, the President of the Catalan Parliament and two grassroots activists.

Government of Catalonia

Oriol Junqueras, Vice-President and Minister of the Economy

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Rebellion Sedition Rebellion Embezzlement of public Embezzlement of public Criminal conspiracy funds funds Embezzlement of public funds

25 years 12 years 74 years

Jordi Turull, Minister of the Presidency

Joaquim Forn, Minister of Home Affairs

Raül Romeva, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Institutional Relations and Transparency

Dolors Bassa, Minister for the Employment and Social and Family Affairs

Josep Rull, Minister for the Territory and Sustainability

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Rebellion Sedition Rebellion Embezzlement of public Embezzlement of public Criminal conspiracy funds funds Embezzlement of public funds

16 years 11 years 74 years

Meritxell Borràs, Minister for Governance

Carles Mundó, Minister of Justice

Santi Vila, Minister of Business and Knowledge

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Embezzlement of public Embezzlement of public Embezzlement of public funds funds funds Criminal conspiracy

Disobedience Disobedience Disobedience

7 years 7 years 24 years € 30,000

Part of the same case but not on trial (accused in Spain although the initial European Arrest Warrants issued against them were eventually withdrawn)

DEFENDANT CHARGES

Carles Puigdemont, President of Catalonia Rebellion Toni Comín, Minister of Health Embezzlement of public funds

Clara Ponsatí, Minister of Education

Meritxell Serret, Minister for Agriculture Disobedience

Lluís Puig, Minister of Culture Embezzlement of public funds

Parliament of Catalonia

Carme Forcadell, President of the Parliament of Catalonia

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Rebellion Rebellion Sedition Criminal conspiracy

17 years 10 years 52 years

Part of the same case but pending trial by the High Court of Justice of Catalonia

Lluís Corominas, Vice-Chair of the Bureau of the Catalan Parliament Lluís Guinó, Vice-Chair of the Bureau of the Catalan Parliament Anna Simó, Secretary of the Bureau of the Catalan Parliament Joan Josep Nuet, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of the Catalan Parliament Ramona Barrufet, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of the Catalan Parliament Mireia Boya, Chair of the CUP-CC Parliamentary Group

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Criminal conspiracy Disobedience Disobedience Disobedience

17 years 10 years 52 years

Part of the same case but not on trial (accused in Spain although the initial European Arrest Warrants issued against them were eventually withdrawn)

DEFENDANT CHARGES

Marta Rovira, Spokesperson for the ERC Parliamentary Rebellion group

Anna Gabriel, Spokesperson for the CUP-CC Parliamentary Disobedience group

Civil Society Organisations

Jordi Cuixart, Chairman of Òmnium Cultural

Jordi Sànchez, Chairman of the Catalan National Assembly

STATE PROSECUTOR’S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S VOX OFFICE OFFICE

Rebellion Rebellion Sedition Criminal conspiracy

17 years 8 years 52 years

Sources: https://internationaltrialwatch.org/en/homepage https://www.ccma.cat/324/keys-catalan-independence-trial

THE TRIAL THUS FAR

The first session of the trial was devoted to preliminary issues and, thus, very much focused on the defences’ claims of violation of fundamental rights throughout the proceedings so far.

The lawyers of the defendants claimed their clients’ right to an impartial trial was not being respected. The fact that some of the judges in the case had also been part in the previous phases of the proceedings would violate, according to the defence, their client’s right to an impartial, “not contaminated” judge. In the same vein, all defences protested they had not been given access to all the case documentation and recalled that the case has been built on the information gathered by a judge investigating a separate case and who, for more than a year and a half, did not concede that he had been investigating the 1st October Referendum.

On a different yet related note, most defences spoke of the violation of the rights to ideological freedom, freedom of expression and the right of manifestation, and recalled that the Constitution prohibits the criminalisation of political dissent and stating that the actions of the defendants were always confined to "the political arena". Similar concerns were echoed in a statement by the International Commission of Jurists released on the same day.

The defences questioned the impartiality of the investigation of the Civil Guard, but also the legitimacy of the public prosecutor's office, the popular accusation and the State Advocacy. The defences recalled that the Lieutenant who signed most of the reports of the case was posting harsh opinions on Twitter under a false identity while conducting his investigations.

Finally, the defences asked the Court to reconsider its decision not to accept some of the witnesses proposed by the defences.