If the reports arriving from different European countries are right, within a very few weeks (in some cases, even within days), there could be a series of legal news stories which will slit open the whole investigation headed by Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena. Belgian justice is ever more opposed to accepting the two European arrest warrants weighing over ministers Toni Comín, Lluís Puig and Meritxell Serret, in this case, for misuse of public funds and disobedience. For its part, the Schleswig-Holstein court, in Germany, which is working on its decision with respect to president Carles Puigdemont and the charges of rebellion, misuse of public funds and disobedience discounted the first charge some weeks ago and, with respect to the second, as the days go by, a certain astonishment is being caused by the insufficient information received from the Supreme Court.
The news of the opposition from the two countries' courts has caused great annoyance among the Spanish government, the judiciary and different institutions of the state, which are starting to prepare for such an eventuality. In terms of politics, apart from Ciudadanos, who are looking to get the greatest possible electoral return, it's obvious that the Partido Popular has reduced its comments for the topic to not occupy all the headlines every day. Public prosecutors and other strata of the Spanish judiciary have done the same. In the media, an important writer like the former editor of ABC, José Antonio Zarzalejos, who always takes positions close to what the state in its broadest sense would say, is already talking openly of alternative scenarios for Llarena if the European warrants are rejected.
The last known part of the documentation requested by German and Belgian justice, to have more information to evaluate the alleged crime of misuse of public funds upheld by judge Llarena, is the simple circumstantial evaluation of an alleged crime. Without evidence, without documentary support from the Treasury, without any book entry showing such misuse of public funds, Llarena hopes that European justice will accept events for which there is no direct evidence. Too little for such serious crimes, some sources say. And, others, that they are too unstable to approve some European arrest warrants which are being examined with magnifying glasses by courts in different countries and on which one day the European courts will have to pronounce.
Everything suggests, as such, and saying it with as much prudence as possible, that we could be on the verge of news to prove promising and definitive for those of us who have always believed that the police and legal narrative was to a large extent untenable when making the trial objective and not a general case against the independence movement.