Attorney General appeals Supreme Court's rejection of amnesty law
Prosecutors denounce Supreme Court's "ideological and political" stance against the law
Spain's Attorney General has presented an appeal to the Constitutional Court against the question of unconstitutionality that the Supreme Court put forward against the amnesty law for those who have sought Catalan independence.
The 49-page document attempts to dismantle the arguments of the Supreme Court against the amnesty.
The appeal text requests that the question of unconstitutionality not be admitted due to formal issues or, if admitted, that the substantive issues raised by the Supreme Court be rejected as having no legal value.
This is the first appeal that the TC will study and resolve.
Prosecutors consider that the Supreme Court "does not precisely identify the legal precepts whose constitutionality" it questions and, in many cases, also uses "purely ideological and political arguments."
"In this case the Supreme Court does not actually question the constitutionality of a legal rule but rejects with absolute conviction the very existence of the law, and, ultimately, the political decision to approve it," the text reads. "This substantial departure from the proper nature and object of a question of unconstitutionality is sufficient reason to agree on its inadmissibility."
Days earlier, prosecutors announced in a report that they were in favor of pardoning the sentenced independence leaders of embezzlement, which is what is currently preventing them from standing for office.
The public office has reported that they are in favor of granting a pardon to former Catalan vice president, Oriol Junqueras, as well as former ministers Raül Romeva, Dolors Bassa, and Jordi Turull.
Each of the politicians are still serving their sentences of disqualification handed down by the Supreme Court in 2019.
Each had been imprisoned for more than three years but were released from jail in early 2021 when they were given a pardon from Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. However, their conviction for misuse of public funds has still stood, meaning they cannot hold public office.