Day 2 of the Catalan independence trial in 10 sentences: the prosecutions' answerThe main arguments put forth by the State Attorney General, the Government Attorney's Office and Vox on the second sitting of the trial at the Supreme Court
Josep Maria Camps
The prosecution table in the Supreme Court
The floor was given to the prosecutions during the second sitting of the Catalan independence trial: the State Attorney General's Office, the Public Prosecution and the private prosecution, Vox.
Attorney General Javier Zaragoza has stated that this is "a trial in defence of Spanish democracy":
"It is intended to turn those who have severely harmed and broken constitutional order into victims of political persecution."
Zaragoza has stated that the accused are not being prosecuted for their ideas, but for having "carried out criminal actions":
"It is a fallacy of mind-boggling dimensions that must be shouted from the rooftops: nobody, not one of the accused, no-one is or has been prosecuted for his or her ideas."
With regard to the violence that took place during the police actions in the context of the 1-O referendum, the Attorney General held the accused responsible:
"The law enforcement forces and agencies should not be held liable for the episodes of violence of 1 October. Rather, the ones who should be held liable are those who mobilised thousands of citizens to act as human walls to prevent the legitimate actions of the police."
According to the Attorney General, both Carles Puigdemont and Marta Rovira cannot be witnesses because they "stand accused in these proceedings":
"To pretend that someone who has been declared in default here should make a statement as a witness through video conference would be in breach of all procedural rules that govern the examination of evidence in court."
Zaragoza has stated that the ruling of the Court of Schleswig-Holstein, which refused the indictment of rebellion, is "interference" in Spanish justice:
"The German court took on the functions of judgment attributed to the Plenary Courtroom of the Supreme Court, and there was therefore undue interference in the jurisdiction of Spanish courts of law."
Fidel Cadena, also an Attorney General, has stated that the pro-independence movement is based on false "post-truths".
"There are a number of truisms or post-truths in the independence process that are untrue. These are expressions which, when repeated a thousand times, seem equivalent to a truth, but are not true in the least."
Cadena has stated that the Catalan Parliament created "a parallel legislation" that prepared "the use of violence" and that the whole became an "explosive cocktail of unilateralism":
"The Board of the Parliament, the governmental and state structures and, ultimately, once the moment has come, the use of violence: all of this was laid down in the White Book, the roadmap and the 'Enfocats' document."
The Government Attorney, Rosa María Seoane, has stated that the State is fully entitled to act as a private prosecution:
"We are here today because facts that constitute crimes have taken place. We are faced with a criminal trial with full guarantees."
The attorney of Vox, Pedro Fernández, requested that the court ban yellow ribbons in the courtroom due to the fact that "they are unquestionably politically loaded":
"Both yesterday and today, one of the accused is in Court visibly wearing an ornament that represents a yellow ribbon which is unquestionably politically loaded."
The presiding magistrate, Manuel Marchena, has not upheld the request:
"The Court interprets it as an ideological symbol and, in consequence, it will not prevent the accused from using the symbol which, as you have stated, one of the accused is displaying."
- Catalan independence trial