Congress will full the approval of the amnesty on May 30 after the Senate's veto on the 14th | Spain | EUROtoday

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.

The Congress of Deputies will definitively approve the controversial amnesty legislation on the finish of May after lifting the veto that the PP will promote within the plenary session of the Senate on the 14th of that month, two days after the Catalan elections. The calendar of the legislation that marked the start of this legislature is now accelerating after the braking technique utilized by absolutely the majority of the PP within the Senate enters its ultimate stretch. On this Monday afternoon, the favored have imposed their management within the Upper House to hold out the opinion of the presentation in opposition to that legislation entrusted to the Constitutional and Justice Commission. The conclusions have been drawn up on the premise of a report by Senate attorneys that questions the constitutionality of the norm and concludes that the legislation might violate European Union rights.

The presentation of the Justice and Constitutional Commission of the Senate met this Monday afternoon to arrange an opinion on the amnesty legislation that, along with the textual content of the attorneys, incorporates the appearances of some summoned consultants and, above all, within the PP veto proposal to the venture despatched from Congress on March 14, when it was accepted there by the bulk. The Senate's ruling should be endorsed at a fee assembly this Thursday, May 9, and the PP's proposal to veto the legislation might be voted on and accepted in a plenary session on May 14.

After this vote within the plenary session of the Senate, the venture – anticipated to be vetoed by the PP in that Chamber, because it has an absolute majority – will return to Congress, which could have the opportunity of elevating this opposition in a plenary session that might be convened on the finish of May. . The plan, in keeping with parliamentary sources, is that its ultimate vote might be on Thursday, May 30. From that second on, the legislation might come into drive instantly and profit the leaders of the independence course of condemned by the Supreme Court and the now Junts candidate to preside over the Generalitat, the previous Catalan president Carles Puigdemont. The courts could have two months to use the rule as soon as it comes into drive, however some results, such because the lifting of precautionary measures, should be issued “immediately” when the legislation is printed within the Official State Gazette (BOE).

The PP has based mostly its place in opposition to the legislation within the Senate on a report commissioned from the attorneys of that fee during which they decide “the unconstitutionality of the norm” and listing a sequence of rights that will come “in battle with the authorized structure of the European Union”.

The opinion against the amnesty that will come out of the Senate includes the fundamental arguments of this report by the experts, who conclude that the law submitted by Congress would require “a prior constitutional reform for its promotion” and that they classify as “plausible” the possibility of “a controversy” before the Constitutional Court because they understand that the norm “suffers” from a series of “different infractions that would affect fundamental principles and rights of both the Constitution and the treaties of the European Union.”

Among these constitutionally questionable principles, the Senate opinion cites that of “legality in criminal matters and legal certainty” due to “the indeterminacy of the material and temporal scope of the amnesty, without reference to specific criminal types or categories of crimes based on the good.” protected legal”; that of equality and fundamental right, “given the delimitation of the material scope of the amnesty, based on a specific ideological motive and regardless of the objective basis of the legal good protected in the types of crimes”; that of prohibiting the arbitrariness of public powers “because of the circumstances referring to the general public context of the presentation of the invoice” which it is presumed “might be indicative of the amnesty responding to the partisan sort”; and that of effective judicial protection in the criminal sphere, “in terms of the urgency of the application procedure and the claim that the mandate for the immediate lifting of precautionary measures is not impeded by the suspension of the criminal procedure for any reason.” .

What affects the most is what happens closest. So you don't miss anything, subscribe.


Contradiction with EU rules

The text of the Senate lawyers assumed by the presentation also concludes that the amnesty could contradict “obligations imposed by the Law of the European Union concerning terrorism and the safety of the monetary pursuits of the Union”, according to several European directives. . The opinion ends by warning Congress and the Cortes in general that if they finally approve the project they would run a “risk” since that decision “could determine, by the jurisdictional bodies that had to apply the amnesty, the raising of a prejudicial question , before the Court of Justice of the European Union, or of a question of unconstitutionality, before the Constitutional Court.”

The socialist group in the Senate, for its part, denounced the veto promoted by the PP and criticizes the content of the report accepted by the commission because it understands that it has “exceeded its function” by stating that the norm is unconstitutional. The PSOE has recalled that the opinion has been limited to reducing “the conclusions of the 15 consultants” to the confirmation of its own “theses of the unconstitutionality of the legislation, when there have been contributions of every kind to this debate.” And he adds there that the same has happened with some of the requested reports, which, according to the socialists, “undergo from an evident bias of partiality except for that issued by the Venice Commission.” The PSOE alludes there to a sequence of conclusions of that advisory physique of the Council of Europe demanded by the PP during which the endorsement of the essence and spirit of the legislation is confirmed, however with some criticisms resembling its pressing processing or the extension of the temporal scope of its utility.