The president of Castilla-La Mancha, Emiliano García-Page, expressed this Friday his interest in giving his opinion at the Federal Committee of the PSOE this Saturday on the political situation, not only what is happening today, but “what It could happen tomorrow or the day after tomorrow”, in relation to a hypothetical amnesty law.
In statements to the media at the opening of the conference being held this Friday in Toulouse on the occasion of European Wine Day, Page expressed his intention to “listen to the details” of the Government agreement between PSOE and Sumar, which will be what is submitted to a vote of the militancy.
However, Page also wants to give his opinion on the future situation, in relation to this amnesty law, which will not be voted for by militancy like the Government agreement between PSOE and Sumar.
Likewise, he reminded the president of the Generalitat, Pere Aragonès, that it is “absolutely obvious” that for there to be an amnesty there must be a prior crime, because “only what has been done wrong is forgiven.”
In his opinion, what is done well “what you need is rewards.” “Let’s see if, instead of amnesty, they are going to want a prize,” said the president of the region.
At this point, he has stressed that “the world of independence, when it makes amnesty proposals, makes them with a minimal, very basic moral basis”, and has accused these parties of wanting to “forgive themselves and, on top of that, for the country to be who recognizes that things were done wrong.”
Thus, he recalled that the pardons, when they were given in Spain, were justified as a pardon for crimes and, on the basis, it was explained that the pardons “were produced because what did not fit constitutionally was amnesty.”
As García-Page has highlighted, if what the pro-independence parties want is amnesty, “the first thing they have to do is recognize compliance with the Constitution and not go off the rails again,” that is, do things “according to to the law.” “What they cannot ask for is to be forgiven for something that, at the same time, they say they have done well,” he insisted.
Likewise, he has recognized that in the country “there is a debate and very considerable social anxiety”, since “at this point it still cannot be certain whether there will be a government or not” and furthermore, he regrets that there is a paradox, in which It seems that “the victims of the constitutional violation of the independence movement become guilty.”
