seems that in Spain there was half done, or done wrong in the process of transition from dictatorship to democracy, in relation to the judicial system, it third power key to determining the quality and healthy democratic social and democratic state of law. In recent months are showing, so stark, many misunderstandings, or being understood, in relation to legality and legitimacy-formaldehyde-social and political-legal structure of the emergency-first-and "special" -after put in place by the rebel military junta during the 1936-39 civil war and successive governments of dictator Francisco Franco to hit sides, decree laws, laws sole legislator and debug files, with no other legitimacy than the force of arms or other aspiration than the annihilation and revenge the "enemy within."
English society assists in disbelief at a series of legal rulings, and tax-around how to apply the Law of Historical Memory, to the logical request for review of convictions of people that the government solemnly acknowledged that they were unjustly imprisoned or executed by court illegitimate, or around the Supreme Court decisions that feed to the allegations against Judge Garzon Falangists, accusing him of prevarication by the simple act of opening proceedings at the request of legitimate parties to ascertain the whereabouts of the missing because of repression on the side of Franco. With the paradox that silence is judicial action under a "least-biased interpretation of the Amnesty Act of 1977 as" stop law "that covers the forgotten victims, avoid the location of their bodies and repair of family honor and memory, along dodging the moral liability trial of his murderers and inductors.
Even before the Historical Memory Law had given decisions of the Supreme Court, specifically by its Board of Military Justice, as if they were out of time and space, with the sheet asepsis cover the body of the crime, have been invoked formalist arguments concerning it seems, lack of "new material facts" that might make it necessary to review the "court" in its day unworthy of being called courts of justice, to deny review of summary judgments of unfairly condemning , treacherous and observing the minimum principles of a criminal worthy of the name, people as significant as Joan Peiró, exemplary union leader, Minister of Industry of the Republic, who publicly opposed and courageous to the excesses of the uncontrolled in the early days of the civil war in Catalonia (inexcusable reading his collection of articles reraguarda knob!) and saved hundreds of people.
Against this background in the meadow court, the chief prosecutor of the State, assisted by the tax board has chosen to deny the request of the Generalitat de Catalunya-covered by the Chief Prosecutor of the community-of promoting adequate review of the trial that condemned to death the martyr President Lluís Companys, with the unique gimmick of giving the prosecution a nonexistent state power to nullify the ruling, which the law does much less directly attributed to fiscal .
is more than likely that the state prosecutor and has tried to avoid a new judicial public scandal, in anticipation of a ruling by the Military Board of the Supreme Court, which, ignoring the statement in individual cases of illegitimacy and lack of any hint of substantive justice in the ruling that sentenced him, as contained in government recognition.
Without ignoring, for that matter, the Supreme Court still has not made a formal recognition of the dignity and reputation of the hundreds of judges who were removed from their careers, degraded or executed by not to under their gown to rebellion, or refusal to judge and condemn rebels to the legitimate authorities. SALVADOR
MILÀ 13/04/2010
(source: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/opinion/Pervivencia/franquismo/judicial/elpepuopi/20100413elpepiopi_5/Tes )
0 comments:
Post a Comment