The Constitutional Court will debate the presentations on the amnesty of the leaders of the process Jordi Turull and Dolors Bassa

The Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court (TC) will debate this week the presentations estimating the amparo appeals of the leaders of the process Jordi Turull and Dolors Bassa against the decision of the Supreme Court not to grant amnesty for the crime of embezzlement of public funds from 1-O.

The deliberation carried out in the last Plenary Session showed that the majority of the court of guarantees is in favor of correcting the interpretation made by the Second Chamber of the High Court, which refused to erase the diversion of funds from the separatist challenge by understanding that there was a purpose to obtain a financial benefit.

As EL MUNDO has been reporting, the leading issue is the appeal for protection by former councilor Jordi Turull, which corresponded to the conservative sector magistrate José María Macías, who, despite being in the minority, has maintained the presentation assuming the criteria of the majority of his colleagues.

In turn, the president of the TC, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, announced in the last plenary session that he would bring his draft ruling on Bassa's appeal to it. In this text, it is proposed to "retroduce the actions" with the objective that the Supreme Court "make a new ruling in which the crime of embezzlement of public funds is declared amnestied."

And that is where the magistrates of the conservative bloc of the TC - including Macías, who has already written a presentation expressing the majority criterion imposed by the progressive sector - believe that there will be "an overreach" by the court of guarantees.

Turull's appeal for protection is the leading issue

Unlike Bassa's presentation, Turull Macías proposes the retroaction of the procedure "so that the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court dictates others that are respectful of the violated fundamental rights, in the terms set forth." Legal sources consulted show their discomfort at the fact that Conde-Pumpido has gone beyond the functions of the TC by expressly telling the TS what it has to do. Likewise, they point out that it is not usual for the ruling to highlight "the preferential and urgent nature" of the protection.

Likewise, another of the points of discussion in the Plenary will revolve around the thickest phrases introduced by the president in his draft sentence on former councilor Dolors Bassa. In it, Conde-Pumpido accused the Supreme Court of making an interpretation of the Amnesty Law "contrary to the spirit and purpose" of the law.

"The interpretation of the law sponsored by the Chamber [in reference to the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court] leads to a drastic contraction of the possibilities of applying the amnesty to the crimes of embezzlement of public funds committed to finance the consultations and the independence process in Catalonia, manifestly contrary to the spirit and purpose of the law that is interpreted," reads the presentation.

Likewise, in the text, the president of the Constitutional Court emphasizes that "the appealed judicial resolutions have not only incurred an unpredictable interpretation of the applicable precepts, but also, by departing from the purpose of the Amnesty Law, they have not maintained the necessary link of coherence between the decision adopted, the norm that serves as its basis and the purposes that justify the institution of the amnesty."

Sources from the court indicate that one of the reasons why Judge Macías decided not to give up his presentation was, precisely, to prevent the progressive bloc from charging against the actions of the Supreme Court. The manifest enmity between Conde-Pumpido and Judge Manuel Marchena - rapporteur of all the resolutions of the court that judged on October 1 - means that for some members of the court, Bassa's presentation has become a settling of accounts with the Second Chamber.

Sources close to the president of the TC explain that it is possible that some expressions in his presentation that have gone down very poorly in the Supreme Court may be "sweetened."

Last Thursday, at an informative breakfast in Madrid, Conde-Pumpido announced that the TC will dictate a "clear" and "precise" doctrine on the amnesty so that it can be executed by the Second Chamber of the High Court.

Last Thursday, at an informative breakfast in Madrid, Conde-Pumpido announced that the TC will dictate a "clear" and "precise" doctrine on the amnesty so that it can be executed by the Second Chamber of the High Court.

For its part, Macías' presentation, assuming the opinion of the majority, uses less crude expressions and maintains that the Supreme Court "departed from the purpose of the norm, incurring a logical failure, consisting of applying a precept with a manifest lack of harmony with what the norm itself intends, that is, making the norm say what it does not say, nor did it expressly mean."

In conclusion, the TC considers that the Supreme Court violated article 24.1 of the Constitution - right to effective judicial protection - in relation to the right to political representation and the criminal legality of the leaders of the process.