He knows they knew they dreamed, fudge

A hope of order, clarity and resolution toured Spain between February 12 and June 12, the four months that the trial lasted to the nationalist prisoners. Like some nearby countries, Spain lived an unstable and confusing time, due to the cracking of the rules that until then had governed public conversation and political debate. To synthesize in a fact the demolished state of things it will suffice to say that a few months before the opening of the trial, the socialist Pedro Sánchez had come to power thanks, among others, to the favorable vote of the parties whose leaders faced the maximum responsibility of the events that had culminated in the declaration of independence of Catalonia. And the main, if not unique, argument of the motion of censure with which he discharged Mariano Rajoy from the presidency were two fake news : that the Popular Party had been criminally convicted of corruption in the Gürtel case and that its leader was at operating current of match box B.

Quickly, and in an unexpected way, the trial began to enter the houses and the subsequent conversation. His protocols, his thoroughness and his rhetorical elegance made a certain and positive impression. There was a way to talk about the facts that set out to establish the truth, and not to skip it, and that it did so by respecting the hard code of the people who participated in the conversation. Judge Manuel Marchena became, in a few days, the symbol of that hygiene. Firm, precise, ironic, and endowed with an appreciable charisma, it became the classic example of a type that could be trusted, as always happens with those who bring together authority and truth at the same time. When, without major fuss, he finally cleared the Chamber, the conviction was extended that the sentence he would write would not deny Buffon : "Style is man." And if that were not enough with what was seen and acted, the specialists indicated that their legal prose was among the best in Spain.

Given this background it is easy to understand the deep impression of discouragement caused in any objective spirit by reading the sentence that was made public yesterday. And, especially, the twelve-page nuclear (263-275) dedicated to rejecting the rebellion, in which the expectation of a clean, sharp and civil prose is diluted in a gelatinous effort and ragula to accommodate the facts to the bed of Procusto. In those pages, the sentence establishes that the Process was a fiction, that their own promoters never took anything more than a dream. The objective of the defendants was not the exercise of the right of self-determination but the exercise of "an atypical right to press", as it is written verbatim in the insurmountable and hallucinatory final paragraph of the proven facts. Comparing it with the facts that really happened in that October, the grotesque character of the magistrates' reasoning can be summarized as follows: the defendants passed laws of constitutional disconnection, held a referendum of self-determination and proclaimed the independence of the Catalan Republic because their intention was to press to the Rajoy Government to negotiate constitutional disconnection laws, hold a referendum on self-determination and proclaim the independence of the Catalan Republic. From what logically derives - and I am amazed at Marchena's lack of value in not writing it down - that the application of article 155, decided by the Government, was only aimed at pressuring the seditious with the application of article 155. In his leguleya Melopea the editor acknowledges that throughout the process described there was violence, but as it can only be adhered to the pressure for independence, and not to independence itself, it was a floating violence, discarnate from rebellion, and thus neutralizing the Rebellion itself that inevitably requires it to be. The scope of the cushioning reasoning mechanism can only be seen, however, in the following chapter, when reading the stubborn argument about sedition, anyone wonders why the so-called right to press or the fictional nature of the entire Process is not enough to absolve also of the seditious crime to dreamers. Catalan lyricism will whine in the streets: "How dare you judge a dream!" And he will be right.

The Prosecutor asked for 25 years in jail for Junqueras , for the crimes of rebellion and embezzlement and the sentence has reduced them by half. The Prosecutor's Office requested that those convicted should not obtain penitentiary benefits until they had served half of the sentence and the sentence allows prisoners to go out to do social services in a few weeks, that is, to continue negotiating independence in their unlawful manner. But the demoralizer is not the reduction of punishment, but the way the Supreme has chosen to make it effective. The deep contempt for the facts that the sentence exhibits. In some purely spiritualistic phases of his prose, Marchena adjudicates the full awareness of his reverie to the seditious. He knows that they knew they dreamed, even if the factual warp of their conviction about such a vivid dream is unfortunately fragile. I have never wanted to get into the skin of a man, ecs, and I will not discuss it. However, I would have appreciated that the sentence had at some time dealt with the devastating effects caused by the sleepwalking of the dreamers. They and all their plans could be a fiction; but the devastating consequences of his conduct, the levels of moral, economic and political ruin that have projected on his community have not been.

For these consequences, precisely, the Spaniards deserved a sentence that spoke to them, that confirmed in writing and for the memory of the future that hope of order, clarity and resolution that the trial supposed. A story of cold transparency, that joined the points without fear to the face of the resulting monster. A sentence that will reserve mercy for punishment and will not contaminate the facts with it. A sentence, let's agree! That will facilitate coexistence. That is to say, that instead of looking at each paragraph of sidelining "the deluded", which is how the paternalist Marchena calls the poor people who believed in the processionary slogans - the august judge who deluded the leaders was not fully understood , and that it was the people who betrayed them, because he did not dare to give them the strength in the street that their leaders demanded-, also dispense his gaze and his moral interest over the other half: the two million intimidated and despised and violated that have been the main victims of the Process, even if no police have broken their nose.

Just observing a human intestine is enough to see how far the fudge is part of evolution. The philosopher Jesus Mosterín wrote years ago: «Life is the realm of contingency and historicity, fasting of foresight and purpose. Only by accumulating tricks, fudges and chiripas we manage to keep the organisms provisionally afloat. We are not perfect, but we have survived, even by the hair ». We will survive. But from the ruling on the most important political crisis of Spanish democracy we did not expect the fudge, but the sharp point and apart from the mutation. As the flamingos of the other Marchena said, it seemed that he sang. And it was only the mandibuleo from which the thirds are passed from one side of the mouth to the other, rinsing.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

• Spain
• Mariano Rajoy
• Pedro Sanchez
• PP
• Catalonia
• Catalonia independence
• 1-O trial
• Manuel Marchena

Spanish Grandstand

Turn of the page The thousand and one faces of Sánchezstein

EditorialThe Government must contemplate a violent reaction