One day, someone who is not a Catalan pro-independence activist, who is not in tune with the movement's political views, or simply, someone who is respectful with what Law means, will explode with outrage over the massive gap between the pronouncements made by European justice and those of Spanish justice when they address issues relating to the former members of Carles Puigdemont's government, the social leaders of the sovereignist organizations and the leaders of the pro-independence parties. It is not just a question of the judicial view on the unity of Spain, but of how the existing legislation is being breached to create a new ad hoc one that covers its position.
On Tuesday we had an example of all this with the Spanish Supreme Court announcement that it intends to review the granting of partial pardons to the nine political prisoners, as carried out by the government of Pedro Sánchez last June. With this decision by the fifth section of the court's administrative disputes chamber, the Supreme Court has corrected itself. The vote, which rectifies the one taken in January, was approved by 3 judges to 2 and - what a coincidence! - there had been a turnover of judges in the chamber, with the retirement of the president, and his replacement converted the 3 to 2 against the review into a 3 to 2 in favour. There is a remote possibility that the nine pardoned political prisoners may return to prison, but the changes that have taken place in the courtroom suggest a scenario that seemed to have been totally ruled out.
While this was being announced in a Madrid still hungover after the king emeritus had blown through and been so well received by the extremist press of the capital, which gave four days of coverage to a shameful visit, absolutely frivolous and irresponsible and at a great distance from any minimum level of decorum and ethical prudence, the Supreme Court deposited a new time bomb in pursuit of its goal of setting the political agenda. It does not seem to matter that pardons are a prerogative of the executive and that the Supreme Court's precedents in the area have been in favour of pardoning Tejero for the 23-F coup attempt as well as Barrionuevo and Vera, who masterminded the GAL.
Several hundred kilometres away, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was announcing its decision to return parliamentary immunity, on an interim basis, to Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Clara Ponsatí, thus restoring the protection inherent in their status as MEPs. The decision of the Luxembourg court is a new blow to the persecution that the three pro-independence politicians have been suffering through the pointless European Arrest Warrants issued by the Supreme Court. But also significant is the dressing-down sent by the court to the chairman of the Committee for Legal Affairs of the European Parliament, the Ciudadanos MEP Adrián Vázquez. The ECJ observes that his behaviour suggests a party position or personal malice against Puigdemont, Comín and Ponsatí. With its decision, the ECJ intends to avoid that situations of risk could occur through their arrest in any country and that irreparable harm would occur if they were handed over to the Spanish authorities.
In any other country, there would be a profound debate on the conduct of the Spanish judiciary with the Catalan pro-independence leaders. Europe's continued pronouncements provide ample material for such a process to take place. But the setbacks in fundamental liberties, justice and democracy are leading to grotesque situations. The latest, this Tuesday with the PSOE, the PP and Vox voting together to oppose an investigation into the sewers of the state and the deep state as a result of what has become known with the Catalangate espionage scandal. It doesn't matter at all that those who are usually allies of the government were those who advocated the creation of the commission: when Spain's 1978 regime calls for a closing of ranks, the alliances are always clear and the PP and Vox never fail the Socialists.