All partners of Pedro Sánchez in his inauguration and in the last Budgets, as well as part of his Government, voted Tuesday against the request of the Supreme Court. The European Parliament, despite this, approved lifting the immunity of Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Clara Ponsatí in a vote that resulted in 400 votes in favor, 248 against and 45 abstentions in the case of the former president. With a slight variation in the vote in the case of the two former councilors of the Government. Puigdemont loses one of his last shelters in his forward flight. But its future remains in the hands of the Belgian Justice, which to date has not been very receptive to the requests for surrender of the Supreme Court.
A few hours after the decision of the European Parliament was known, the instructor of the cause of the ‘procés’, Pablo Llarena, raised a preliminary question before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to rule on the scope of the Euroorder and the reasons for your denial. The trigger was the rejection of the Belgian authorities in January to the delivery of Lluís Puig, a decision in which the Supreme Court’s competence to judge him was questioned. With the answers of the CJEU, the magistrate will decide if it maintains, withdraws or issues new Euro-orders with respect to Puig himself, Puigdemont, Antoni Comín, Clara Ponsatí and also Marta Rovira, tried in absentia for crimes of sedition, embezzlement of public funds or disobedience.
As reported by ABC, Llarena has doubts that the decision of the Belgian authorities to deny the delivery of Puig is compatible with the law of the Union, based on mutual trust between the member countries, for which he raises seven questions to the CJEU, including the extent to which the Belgian enforcement body has the power, in accordance with Union law, to control the jurisdiction of the issuing body, in this case the High Court.
In parallel, the decision provoked a political pulse with the epicenter in the government coalition, once again fractured. Socialists disagree with the position of their partners. Once again they have found themselves voting, as is usual in Europe, together with the PP and Ciudadanos. This time also with Vox. There is discomfort with the position of Podemos, coinciding with all the Europhobic forces on the continent, but the truth is that the government considered the position of those of Pablo Iglesias “predictable”. That is why yesterday they wanted to make the discrepancy clear, but isolate it from the coexistence in the coalition. “Nothing new, but his diagnosis is flawed at this point,” say government sources. The position of the coalition partners does not like in the rest of the Executive, but from La Moncloa it was avoided to question Podemos for this fact, despite making clear the divergence of criteria. The Government Spokesperson, Maria Jesus Montero, transferred as an official message “satisfaction” with the result of the vote because it means that “the request of one of the powers of the State will be addressed.”
Montero rejected that they have to ask Iglesias for explanations for the meaning of the vote of his MEPs. He assured that the issue has not been addressed in the Council of Ministers nor informally, and referred the request for explanations “to the environment of the European Parliament.” Explanations that he already demanded in the morning Iratxe GaRCIA, socialist spokesman in the European Parliament. Asked how these discrepancies of opinion between the coalition partners should be resolved, Montero rejected the idea that there should be any reflection or in the scope of the Government.
The spokeswoman tried to frame these discrepancies as normal. And he went on to explain that PSOE and United We Can They are “two different formations” to which they are joined by the Government agreement, but that the formations “are free to express the meaning of their vote in the European Parliament.” That is why he defended that “there is no environment where they are resolved” because both are “free”, that the two formations have their “preserved autonomy” and that sharing the Government “does not oblige them to mimic each other”, but that “it does oblige unity of action within the Government ”. The spokeswoman defined the events as “quite predictable” and claimed that the strategy regarding Catalonia remains intact: «We are not going to alter our vocation for dialogue or specific agreements». Montero could not contain his laughter at this point when asked about the threat made by ERC spokesman Gabriel Rufián to distance himself from the Executive. The pro-independence spokesman also criticized the return to prison of Oriol Junqueras and the rest of the condemned: “If they continue like this, they will end up celebrating it at home and not in Moncloa,” said Rufián, who boasted of being “essential” for governance . After reminding Montero of these words, the government spokeswoman was convinced that this matter “is not going to affect relations at all.”
The Government defends that “Mr. Puigdemont has to be tried” because “there was a unilateral imposition violating the democratic majorities and the powers of each administration.”
From early in the morning the Government wanted to establish a position. In an address recorded and sent to the media, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Arancha González Laya, argued that “a MEP cannot take advantage of his condition to protect himself from appearing before national courts for possible violations of national laws.”
The divergences with respect to Iglesias on central issues are well studied in Sánchez’s environment. With a diagnosis: it benefits him that there is that difference between him and Iglesias. But at the same time he avoids the direct clash so as not to lose the favor of the Podemos electorate, which values him positively. But at the same time the discrepancy allows him to address his more temperate constituents. And to his great ambition not reached: a part of the orphans of Ciudadanos. In the scope of the Congress of Deputies the discrepancy has also been made visible. The PSOE spokeswoman in Congress, Adriana LastraIt was clear: “I do not understand the position of those who voted against it, because it is a procedure to facilitate the work of Justice, but they should ask United We Can”. The feeling is generalized in the PSOE. Pablo Echenique denied that it was a procedure and accused the socialists of voting with PP and Vox and going against «The solution in dialogue».
George is Digismak’s reported cum editor with 13 years of experience in Journalism