Pardons cannot be removed from legal control

The decision of the Supreme Court, known yesterday, to reject all the appeals filed against the Government's pardons for the

prisoners is deeply

.

It has been the Fifth Section of the Third Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the High Court, and not its plenary session, which agreed by a small majority of three lawyers against two to estimate the previous allegations made by the State Attorney.

Based on them, all have been

alleging that he

recurring

.

The 63 files that remain inactivated were presented at the time by Vox;

the People's Party;

the former delegate of the Government in Catalonia, Enric Millo;

deputies of the PP of Catalonia in a private capacity;

deputies of Cs;

and the Catalan Civic Coexistence and Pro Patrimonium Sijena and Jerusalem associations.

In view of the ruling, it is at least disturbing that the Supreme Court has ignored the substance of an issue that affects the heart of the Spanish constitutional order: the unity of the State and the attempts to attack it.

The fact of labeling as non-legitimized actors such as political parties and citizen associations clearly harmed by the secessionist process opens the door to a question whose answer exceeds the scope of this refusal to reconsider the legality of

: If it is not the political parties -whose representativeness emanates from the polls- nor the citizen associations who can represent the party harmed by an illegitimate constitutional process, who is suitable for it? Who can give voice to those affected?

From such a restrictive criterion of the Supreme Court to recognize the affected party, a lack of control over the legality of pardons may arise in practice.

Proof of this fragility is

with which the dismissal of the resources is signed, a single vote.

It is worth wondering why such a transcendental issue was not referred to the Plenary of the Supreme Court.

And it should be remembered that the same reason, the lack of active legitimacy, was used by the same Court to reject two appeals by PP and Vox against the appointment of Dolores Delgado as attorney general.

It is impossible to ignore here the pronouncement of the Supreme Prosecutor's Office rejecting the pardons for not concurring "no reason admissible in law" and because they would be equivalent to privileging "the disloyal and corrupt ruler."

As the Public Prosecutor itself insinuated, what underlies are "political agreements":

.

Decisions like yesterday's generate

in society, and inevitably invoke suspicion about the impunity of the arbitrariness of power.

Today, as then, the Spanish know that a crude parliamentary calculation is behind a measure of grace that those who boast that they would commit the crime again do not deserve.

Society does not have to share Sánchez's ability to endure such humiliations in order to perpetuate himself in power.

To continue reading for free

Sign inSign up

Or

and you will have access to all the web content of El Mundo