A report issued in the Telenotícies Migdia of this Sunday maintains that it
was a "declaration of intentions"
The TV-3 news programs have
changed the way of referring to the declaration of
independence on October 27, 2017. For the first
time ever, in the Telenotícies of
this past Sunday it has been openly stated that this declaration of
independence was not effective, but rather it was a simply simbolic declaration
of intentions which was not published
in the official bulletins. A perspective coincidental with the line of defense
raised last week by the former
minister of Home Affairs Joaquim Forn during the oral hearing of the
trial in the Supreme Court: he declared that "the
independence was not declared at all".
Thus, the Telenotícies of this Sunday at noon has
issued a report in which, among other testimonies, the statements of Carme Forcadell to the judge are heard; she said: "It is a
symbolic political declaration, Your Honor. No parliamentary procedure was
initiated because, as you said, it was not registered nor voted."
Likewise, a statement from the leader of ERC
Marta Rovira is included,
in which she affirmed: "It could not have any effects, because we knew
what was the political context that was on the board".
Statements of a former lawyer of Parliament
Was the declaration symbolic? Did it actually get
to be voted? Josep Maria Martí Rigau, a journalist with great political experience,
responds to these questions, pointing out that "that day in the Parliament
of Catalonia everything was being prepared not to get hurt. In the end, there
was fear".
The voice in off in the piece emphasizes that the
fact that what was voted was "a proposal of resolution" results in
the declaration not being really a law but only a “declaration of intentions”.
The report includes statements by Francesc Pau, a
former lawyer of the Parliament, who maintains: "Parliaments pass laws
that have legal effects and resolutions that do not have any legal effects; the
Parliament expresses an opinion. It does not go further".
Something else was voted
The journalist points out that, although Forcadell
reads the declaration of independence in the Parliament, she herself makes it
clear that the part to be voted on is quite another. It is also highlighted the
fact that the Secretary General and the principal lawyer of the Parliament leave
the plenary session at the very time of the voting, and that this declaration
is not published in the official bulletin of the Parliament. During the oral
hearing of the trial, the prosecutor Javier Moreno was wrong in his argument in
the session on previous issues when he pointed to the declaration as published
in the official gazette of the Generalitat.
On October 26, EL PERIÓDICO published a research
report in whith details on how the “fake UDI
was created. Thus, at the
meeting of the Board of the Parliament on the 27th, it was made clear that only
the operative part, not the preamble, was "subjected to voting and
approval", and therefore, that the resolution had no "legal
effects". The Board also wanted to leave in a written record that the
preamble, which included the declaration of independence proper, would not be
put to a vote.
The other trick was the format of the text itself.
A proposal for a resolution was voted, which in parliamentary dynamics is
nothing more than a document that urges the Government to take a series of
decisions. Neither was an institutional declaration nor a proposition with the
rank of law. And what that text called upon the Executive was to approve all
the decrees and resolutions necessary to develop the law of legal transition
-which created a new Catalan legal framework-, starting with the
"expedition to the citizenship" of the Catalan identity documents.
0 comentarios:
Post a Comment