Just two minutes needed to the president of the Court of Justice of the EU, Koen Lenaerts, to read the conclusions of the case Junqueras. Enough to cause a storm of political that ended up opening the doors of Parliament to the refugees Carles Puigdemont, and Toni Comín. However, the European Parliament maintains doubts about the current immunity of Oriol Junqueras. Legal services are reminded that the leader of ERC is no longer in provisional imprisonment, but sentenced, and reiterate that the “assessment” of your situation depends on the Supreme Court.
The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) —that the last Thursday determined that Junqueras enjoyed immunity in June and should have been authorized to pick up your certificate of mep, he pointed out how it should have been the Spanish Supreme Court with Junqueras when this was in pre-trial detention; but it was not to appreciate that your situation changed after the judgment of 14 October, which sentenced him to 13 years for sedition and malfeasance. This radical change of context is picked up, however, in a note prepared by the legal services of the european Parliament, to which he has had access to THE COUNTRY.
The note, three pages, expressly recalls that the vice-president of the Catalan government “currently is not subject to measures of provisional detention”, but is “serving a sentence of rigorous imprisonment”.
The document —signed by the jurists of the european Parliament Freddy Drexler, Niklas Görlitz and Cristina Burgos— adds that the CJEU left in the hands of the Spanish justice, “the assessment” of the “effects that should be linked to the immunities” Junqueras now, “without specifying those effects and consequences or clarify the precise scope of the immunities currently applicable” to the leader of ERC after the start of the ninth period of sessions of the European Parliament.
The note came from the general secretariat of the Parliament on Thursday. But before, in the morning, the institution had experienced several moments of tension. According to sources in parliament, a section of officials of the Chamber noted that the leap has always been one that gave the ruling regarding the regulation of elections, considering that “the condition of member of the European Parliament” is acquired by “be elected by direct universal suffrage in a free vote and secret ballot”, the margin requirements set by each State.
In that sense, the consequences of the ECJ judgement go beyond the case of the vice-president of the Catalan language. Represent a before and an after in the doctrine of the european institutions. The CJEU limited from now to the election period the role of the States: after the proclamation of the deputies, the procedure passes to the hands of the European Parliament.
Well explained in the note of legal services: the “legal acquisition” of the status of “member” of the European Parliament is not subject to the “formal notification of the results by the States”, but that is acquired, along with the immunity, after the proclamation of election results.
That interpretation allowed the Parliament to lift the Friday the ban that prevented Puigdemont and Comín, fleeing the Spanish justice, from 2017, to enter into their facilities and receive a pass provisional accreditation. However, the report warns of the questions left by the failure of Luxembourg in the case of Junqueras.
Meetings tense
The officials cited considered on Thursday that the sentence was very clear, and demanded that the president of the european Parliament, David Sassoli, to appear before the plenary in order to recognize Junqueras, Puigdemont and Comín as members of the House. According to sources, that possibility disturbed greatly to the Spanish parties constitutionalists and other sectors of the European Parliament, which preferred to await the steps that give you the Supreme. The leader of the social democrats, the Spanish Iratxe García, remained tense meetings with these officials, and subsequently an intense encounter with Sassoli.
The president appeared finally in the plenary by calling the order to the booing of some of the members. Read then a statement that did not contain any explicit reference to Junqueras, Puigdemont and Comín, but in that she referred to the “competent authorities in spain to comply” with the ruling and gave instructions to the services of the european Parliament to study how it affected the verdict to the “composition” of the chamber.
