Supreme Court magistrate Pablo Llarena has rejected the appeals filed both by the defense and by the accusations against the order confirming the prosecution of former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont for the crimes of disobedience and aggravated embezzlement. After reviewing his initial decision in light of the reform that repealed sedition and modified embezzlement, the judge refused to add the new crime of aggravated public disorder, as requested by the State Attorney’s Office

Puigdemont accused Llarena of ignoring the penal reform promoted by the Government last autumn and agreed with ERC, while both the Public Ministry and the legal services of the State asked to add to the crimes of disobedience and aggravated embezzlement the new crime of aggravated public disorder. .

In a resolution dated January 12, Llarena eliminated the crime of sedition from the prosecution against Puigdemont, but maintained the crime of embezzlement -which sets penalties of 4 to 12 years in prison and 10 to 20 years of disqualification- and included the crime of disobedience. -which does not contemplate prison, but does include disqualification of between 6 months and 2 years-. In addition, he annulled the Eurowarrant issued against the independence leader, although he decided to maintain the national search and capture order.

 

Apart from that of Puigdemont, Llarena also reviewed the cases of former councilors Toni Comín and Lluís Puig, whom he also prosecuted for disobedience and embezzlement, and those of Clara Ponsatí and Marta Rovira, to whom he accused a crime of disobedience.

 

Regarding the request of the Prosecutor’s Office and the Lawyer’s Office to add to the prosecution the new crime of aggravated public disorder, Llarena responds in his order that the penal reform “has not modified the crime of sedition to be subject to new legal requirements or reduce its sentence, but has repealed it.”

“And since the accusations cannot divide the provisions of the new law and evade this repeal, the application of the reform entails a decriminalization of the article that was applicable under the previous legislation,” he stresses.

Puigdemont’s immunity

The procedure in the Court of Auditors

Instead, he indicates that

Supreme Court magistrate Pablo Llarena has rejected the appeals filed both by the defense and by the accusations against the order confirming the prosecution of former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont for the crimes of disobedience and aggravated embezzlement. After reviewing his initial decision in light of the reform that repealed sedition and modified embezzlement, the judge refused to add the new crime of aggravated public disorder, as requested by the State Attorney’s Office

Puigdemont accused Llarena of ignoring the penal reform promoted by the Government last autumn and agreed with ERC, while both the Public Ministry and the legal services of the State asked to add to the crimes of disobedience and aggravated embezzlement the new crime of aggravated public disorder. .

In a resolution dated January 12, Llarena eliminated the crime of sedition from the prosecution against Puigdemont, but maintained the crime of embezzlement -which sets penalties of 4 to 12 years in prison and 10 to 20 years of disqualification- and included the crime of disobedience. -which does not contemplate prison, but does include disqualification of between 6 months and 2 years-. In addition, he annulled the Eurowarrant issued against the independence leader, although he decided to maintain the national search and capture order.

Apart from that of Puigdemont, Llarena also reviewed the cases of former councilors Toni Comín and Lluís Puig, whom he also prosecuted for disobedience and embezzlement, and those of Clara Ponsatí and Marta Rovira, to whom he accused a crime of disobedience.

 

Regarding the request of the Prosecutor’s Office and the Lawyer’s Office to add to the prosecution the new crime of aggravated public disorder, Llarena responds in his order that the penal reform “has not modified the crime of sedition to be subject to new legal requirements or reduce its sentence, but has repealed it.”

“And since the accusations cannot divide the provisions of the new law and evade this repeal, the application of the reform entails a decriminalization of the article that was applicable under the previous legislation,” he stresses.

Puigdemont’s immunity

The procedure in the Court of Auditors