considers that the General Court has committed errors of law and considers that the respondent of the request and the Chairman of the Legal Commission of the Eurochamber of CS may have shown “a position or personal bias contrary to the representative”.
- Catalonia They Investigate Whether Puigdemont Considers Accepting the Feasibility of Russian Proposal on Cryptocurrencies
- Courts Putin’s Envoy Offers Cryptocurrency Help to Fund Independent Catalonia
Court of Justice of the European Union As a precautionary measure today, MEPs restored full immunity to Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comón and Clara Ponsat, in a decision that overturns a previous decision by the General Court. The High Court considers that the magistrates erred in law, that if they were kept in custody “even for a few weeks”, serious harm could be caused and states that the respondent of the request or the President legal affairs committee Room’s “contrary to deputies” could have shown a personal bias. And so I return the right till a definitive decision is taken on the merits of your case.
The case pertains to the beginning of the year 2020, when the President second room The Spanish Supreme Court referred to eurocamara Two separate pleas requesting the removal of the immunity of claimants within the framework of criminal proceedings, to proceed with the execution of European arrest warrants. On March 9, 2021, Parliament suspended the immunity of three deputies after a lengthy process was slowed by the pandemic. On May 19, 2021, he filed an appeal for annulment before the General Court of Justice of the European Union. And a week later, on 26 May 2021, he also submitted a request for provisional measures in which he asked the Deputy General Court to immediately suspend the Eurochamber’s decision, as he estimated that losing immunity would “harm him”. may be” “serious and irreparable and violated their right to perform their duties as Europeans”.
On June 2, 2021, immediately, the Vice-President of the General Court ordered that the execution of the decisions of Parliament be suspended, but a few weeks later, on 30 July, after analyzing the case more calmly, the same magistrate gave his Changed the decision and dismissed the petition, considering that the deputies “were not able to demonstrate that the need for urgency was met” and not considering that “serious and irreparable damage” was caused “certainly”. Qualified from or recognized with a degree of probability”. enough”. Catalan MEPs appealed in cassation before the Court of Supreme Instance, and today they are proved correct.
Today’s Decision of the Court Vice President Cancels the Ordinary Court, Finds Errors of Law in Magistrates LuxembourgDetects the potentially serious harm of loss of immunity to politicians, while making a final decision on the funding of his position (pending in Luxembourg) and also attacks the request’s respondent, a Bulgarian deputy who is part of the political family. Vox in the Eurochamber and chairman of the Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee, Adrian Vazquezfrom Ciudadanos, speculating that they may have been biased towards the plaintiffs.
The magistrate believes that his accomplice made a mistake because the existence of the European arrest warrant issued “is, in itself, an obligation to proceed with the arrest of those who are the object of those descriptions and, therefore, a large the likelihood that the person is said to have been detained.”, therefore there was a mistake in the legal merit of the facts when considering that the deputies had not demonstrated with a sufficient likelihood that their detention was likely, “because it was then until the details are withdrawn. In the opinion of the Deputy Speaker of the Court, it is clear that the arrest of a Member of Parliament, in his case for several weeks, until the adoption of the decision on his surrender, may make him serious and irreparable”.
The second argument of their decision is much more controversial and may result from the petition process, which is carried out by the Commission on Legal Affairs in the Eurochamber itself. Cases are rotated among the members and are usually given on a regular basis. The Commission does not rule on the matter, it only recommends the immunity to be raised if the deputy is claimed for any act done before his election or for reasons that have anything to do with his activity as a member of the Chamber. -Do not give. However, in his letter, the Vice-Chairman of the CJEU made a direct allegation against the respondent of the request, Angel Zambazkiand the Chairman of the Civil Commission. “Prima facie it appears that they exhibit a personal bias against a post or deputation. It cannot be excluded that membership of a political group that includes the European representative of the Vox political party may have a potential bias against can raise legitimate doubts about deputies,” he argues. Something that jeopardizes the essence of the process, as political affiliation may be enough to dissuade a decision from now on. The legal services of the Eurochamber are studying the decision to file an appeal.
The third element of the decision, more logical and less controversial, is urgency. The judge considers that the request to maintain immunity was justified, because the fact that the deputies had not been detained by then does not mean that they cannot be. As indeed demonstrates the temporary detention in Puigdemont, Italy last September. On the other hand, the Vice President of the Court of Justice rejected Spain’s allegation that the alleged damages by the deputies could not be materialized because the execution of the European arrest warrants issued against them was suspended by an order of the CJEU has gone. , In other matters being decided in Luxembourg, which affects the former director lus puigoalso claimed by Spain According to Blagica But he ain’t MEP
according to the norms of