A legal report from Congress qualifies pepper spray as a weapon and opens the way to sanctioning a representative

A legal report from Congress to which EL PAÍS has had access maintains that the pepper spray that the popular representative Ana Belén Vázquez displayed in the chamber last Wednesday should be considered a weapon and opens the door for the Board to process her temporary suspension. The report incorporates data from the Chamber's security recordings, which show Vázquez handing an object to a worker from the popular group who, immediately afterwards, enters two of the bathrooms where minutes later irritating gases are detected. As a result, more than 20 people suffered symptoms of poisoning and at least three filed complaints. The lawyers' document does not establish who released the substance nor does it prove that the object given by the popular deputy to her collaborator was the spray, but it is open to sanctioning the deputy.

The main conclusion of the report is that pepper spray should be considered a weapon, which is explicitly prohibited from being carried in the House. “Sprays, including approved ones, cannot but be considered a weapon for the purposes of the Congressional Regulations,” the lawyers estimate, concluding that even if the aerosol was specifically approved and could be legally acquired by an adult, it does not change, according to the report, its nature as a weapon for the purposes of parliamentary discipline.

The report cites a ruling from the Supreme Court (1112/2024) that stipulates that “the concept of a weapon does not depend exclusively on the regulation contained in the Weapons Regulations” and echoes a doctrine by which any instrument capable of “offending and defending” and capable of injuring life, health or physical integrity. The Supreme Court had also considered a “dangerous instrument for criminal purposes” an aerosol that emits irritating gases capable of canceling, even temporarily, the vision of the person receiving it.

Article 101 of the Chamber's Rules of Procedure establishes the procedure for temporarily suspending the status of deputy as a result of various behaviors, including "carrying weapons within the parliamentary premises." But the Board, with a progressive majority, will not be able to suspend the deputy itself, but rather a procedure must be opened by which Vázquez will have a period of time to formulate his allegations and access the documentation in the file. After that period, the Board has the power to decide whether to propose the suspension or not. In the first case, the proposal is submitted to the Plenary Session, which must vote on it. The affected representative will not be able to cast her vote.

The lawyers assure that "the General Secretariat is not aware that ever, since the approval of this Regulation in 1982, the procedure established in this provision has had to be applied."

Furthermore, the lawyers understand that the presidency of the Chamber “was fully entitled to order its deposit”, in exercise of the police powers recognized by the Constitution.