José Antonio Vázquez Taín . La Merca, Orense, 1968. Judge. He is one of the most famous magistrates in Spain: from the fight against the Galician narcos to the Asunta case. Publish Pulse to the State , a book with all the keys of the trial of the process .

I have a partner who argues that we are all much closer to the jail than we think. It's true. There are certain crimes of which a large part of the population is not aware. Crimes against road safety, family abandonment, job security ... People think that if they do not kill and do not steal, they will not have problems with justice, but justice is much more complex because coexistence demands it. So be careful. It was said because it seems that some of the prisoners of the 'procés' thought that they went out to the street one morning to ride a little while and then home to watch a series, that they did not even consider the possibility of jail. Independents were aware that they were breaking the law. But they felt unpunished because during the whole process, since in December 2012 Junqueras and Mas signed the agreement for the national transition, they saw that the State did nothing. So they kept tightening the rope. They knew that they were crossing the red lines of legality, but they thought that with the power of the Generalitat and the inaction of the State nothing would happen to them. It is one of the things I wonder in the book, why do they say that politics is being prosecuted when the State has done nothing? Justice only intervenes in the wake of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence. If not, he would not have acted, even though they were already committing acts against the law. Was it necessary to prosecute the situation? There is a part of the sentence of the process that no one has read and is fundamental. 130 pages in which it is explained with the law in hand why it was necessary to enter. It explains what a modern democracy is, what a rule of law is and how the separation of powers works. We have ignored that part because from the beginning this has been considered as a political and not legal conflict, when it is just the opposite. In democracy the least important are the polls. The important thing is the rule of law, the separation of powers, the impartiality of the media ... Because that framework is the one that creates security so that when the citizen goes to vote he does so freely and what he votes will be fulfilled . Here we have entered the rag of how I have a deputy more than you, this I can already do. No, sir, you not only have to respect the law, you have to promote respect for the law. And that with the process has not occurred. What would happen if tomorrow a conservative government triumphs and eliminates autonomy by royal decree? Well, the judges would have to put them in jail. Is the separation of powers in Spain fiction, reality or a mixture? The separation of powers in ordinary justice is absolute. The judges are totally independent and that bothers some politicians. What happens is that political influence is skyrocketing in the appointment of positions for the General Council of the Judiciary, the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. That is what makes certain corruption judgments you find that half of the magistrates in the courtroom have been proposed at the request of the PSOE and the other half of the PP. It is normal that in all the States a part of the judges is named, but in Spain we pass and Europe criticizes us for it in multiple reports that indicate the exaggerated political contamination of the Spanish justice. In Spain the criterion of merit is valued less than that of ideology when appointing judges. Was it inevitable that the 'procés' would end up in trial and convictions? If since 2012, when the laws began to be transgressed, it had acted, there would be no social conflict that we have today in Catalonia. This situation has been caused by political actions, not legal proceedings. If the law had been applied from the beginning, there would have been no process . You have entered late at the judicial level. Although it has been well entered, because even Amnesty International has said that the trial has been exemplary and no rights have been violated. Is there a legal right to decide? Not at all. The right to decide is an invented concept, a slogan to deceive the masses. All the speech of the independentistas is based on an invented terminology. You try , right to decide ... I challenge anyone to look for whether, before 2012, the term "right to decide" had been used by some political party. It is an invention, but an intelligent invention. Because who is going to deny the citizen their right to decide? We are all going to feel identified with that slogan, but to decide what? To kill the neighbor? Specify, you. It is precisely that vagueness in terminology that they seek for mass social adherence to occur. That is the trap in which we have fallen from the institutions, to debate ideas while the independence movement appeals to feelings. How is it possible that the ultraconservative PNV, the ultra-left ERC and the bourgeois PDeCAT have the same approaches? Because independence is not political, it is confrontational. They want one thing above all: to be recognized differently from the rest. In the 21st century there is a part of the Spaniards who do not want to be compared with Murcia. That is the most retrograde and undemocratic one. What is your assessment of the sentence? It is a very complex and very well argued sentence, but if you bring together two jurists, we will always find flaws. What do you find this one? I squeak more is like a judge, because the Supreme Court tends to recriminate certain attitudes of control of the room that in these 52 days of process we have seen. The judge has gained prominence to limit the actions of the parties, when normally the judges do not usually intervene in the trials. But I think it was justified because from the first minute the defendants had the intention of turning the trial into an international show and thanks to that way of acting the judge did not succeed. He avoided that they could be painted as victims and that hurt them because there was no show. Does the non-extradition of Puigdemont weaken the position of Spanish justice? Europe was going at a very good speed towards legal unification, but nationalisms have broken the EU and each country has begun to make war on its own. They knew very well that Belgium does not respect the euroorder, they do not even give us terrorists with proven blood crimes, and that is why they went there. They take refuge in that Brussels has not given extradition as if that proved that they are not guilty and not at all. It is simply that they took refuge in a judicial paradise. After thoroughly studying the situation, what solution do you see? It would have an immediate solution if we return to respect the rules of the game of a modern democracy, not of a banana republic. What happens is that I don't see that going to happen in the short term. We are going to get worse because we are a country of taking things to the extreme and the political ambition of certain characters will make the situation degrade so much that Justice will have to intervene again. I don't think there will be a violent conflict, but there will be a lot of social confrontation. I have just been to Catalonia and it is felt on the street. There will have to be a click for politicians to realize that the situation has gone away from them. It is in your hands. At the moment they fulfill their role and lead the solution by dialoguing within the legal norms, the citizen himself will follow his example, but it has reached a point where, when talking about dialogue, everyone seems to consider it a defeat. political parties are using the uncertainty to win elections. Of course you have to sit down to discuss, but you have to sit down defining the terms and that doesn't seem to interest you. We have seen it in these elections: the left has recovered the term Spain to try to retain that vote that could escape, but as soon as the elections pass they speak again of a plurinational State, of federalism ... What is federalism? Germany and Canada are federal states and have no autonomies. In Spain, despite not being federal, regional governments can legislate on education, security ... What more skills do they want? These dialectical demagogies make any negotiation between Spanish politicians more populist than real.

As in social networks we are all judges, it was decided that the sentence was very soft or very hard, but nobody seems happy with it. In Spain we have no judicial culture and it is very sad because we have one of the best judicial systems in the world. The Anglo-Saxon system, for example, is absurd madness: either you have money or you are annoyed. Unfortunately, that of Gila is still in force: "If you are a foreigner, it is better." Spain is a country that has many examples to give at the judicial level. Our system is extremely guaranteed, so of course conservatives will find it a soft sentence, but it is that in the slightest doubt we must apply the most favorable interpretation for the accused. And that is positive although it usually seems to people that penalties are scarce. That's why judgments with a popular jury are dangerous ... Don't you trust them? They're not reliable. Especially since they were assigned the most complex cases, which are those related to the deprivation of life and those of prevarication. You see sentences like that of Mr. Camps in Valencia and immediately you realize that they have not understood anything. The difference between prevarication and bribery is a very complex issue that I am still studying and a popular jury cannot understand. The culprit wants a jury and the innocent, a professional judge. The jurors can have the emotion. They see the body of a girl and need a culprit even if the evidence is not solid. It is understandable, but a judge knows how to manage it. Have you gone home many times thinking that you have released a guilty party? I have been a judge in Coruña many years ago and I know the entire squad of criminals. Only by modus operandi , I know who it has been. What happens is that it is one thing that has that certainty and another that can prove it judicially. If I can't, I have to acquit. It is better to release one hundred culprits to the street than to put an innocent in prison. We see it with the issues of gender violence and sexual assaults. Popular justice is always condemnatory, because we continue to carry the DNA of Torquemada in the blood, but above that, legal security and the principle of defense must be installed. Therefore, in these matters, even if they are very painful, you have to stand and analyze calmly. It is very hard, and it has happened, that someone has signed a conviction for a violation and, after five years in jail, DNA evidence proves that he was innocent. Such a case is a huge step back in that fight. What is your position regarding the non-application of the reviewable permanent prison in sexual crimes without murder? What is a great mistake that does not apply to stop serial rapists. But it is curious that those who criticize the reviewable permanent prison as a concept, are those who when convicted with 12 or 14 years a violation seems little. A homicide is 10 and we have to have a correlation between sentences. We cannot use justice to manipulate political ideas. Is the serious crime cheap in Spain? It was cheap, but less so. Currently, the penalty enforcement system is stricter and many sentence reductions have been eliminated. Spain has a benevolent criminal code, but very effective. Is everyone rehabilitable? Never. Each crime is different. The recidivism of a sex offender is guaranteed. Therefore, in these cases it is not understandable that the system is so benevolent. A progressive system, with a much wider range of penalties for the same crime in which your final sentence depends largely on how evolutions inside prison, would be more effective than putting three years yes or yes, show improvement or not. one of the main judges against drug trafficking in Galicia. How do you value the Fariña phenomenon? Drug trafficking was a tremendous scourge and cannot be forgotten now. When I arrived in Villagarcía in 98, the narcos were the heroes of society, financed campaigns and bought politicians. In the series it is always the right that sold and the left that fought against the narco, but it is a lie. They were all sold. It seemed that, if you were against the narcos, you were attacking the fundamental rights of Galician society. We were the bad guys. To flip that image, what we did was rely heavily on mothers against drugs, start putting tons of cocaine on the table and attack the branch of the tie. When we begin to arrest tax advisors and make public acts to return that money to the State, we win over society. And when we succeeded, the politicians changed sides and supported us, because there were votes. Therefore, you cannot imagine how much damage these series do to the kids. If they see a way to earn easy money and they are painted as fun and even admirable, they will fall. The series should consider that frivolizing with that is like frivolizing with gender violence or sexual assault. He was also the judge of one of the most media cases in recent years, the assassination of Asunta Basterra. Are we a morbid society? Yes, it loses us to inhuman points. That happens in underdeveloped societies. The morbidity in Spain is occurring, above all, because the citizen who is economically annoyed likes to see that the rich also have problems and are criminals. It is a pattern that coincides in many of these cases. For example, Diana Quer's was unsuccessful at first and became mediatic when the parents' problems transcended. Just the fact that a criminal had murdered a girl was not enough to arouse the interest he later had. The same happened with Asunta's parents. When you work in these types of cases, does the evil chase you home? There are colleagues who take a shower with the robe, they cannot disconnect, but I take it off. The human being has seven instincts that have been given different names throughout history. Greek philosophers spoke of emotional imbalances and Catholics spoke of capital sins. We are animals rather than rational. Who manages to master those instincts, for me is a hero. And we return to Catalonia, what they are doing is manipulating those instincts: they enhance the pride of superiority to create a state of hate and generate anger. And from there, it is already uncontrollable.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Supreme Court
  • Proced judgment
  • Catalonia independence
  • Justice
  • Final Interview

'Procés'The Supreme Court disagrees with the EU lawyer and insists that Carles Puigdemont is not immune

'Procés'The Constitutional confronts the debate on the resources of Oriol Junqueras divided

Justice Josep Lluís Trapero questions the competence of the National Court to judge him when the rebellion in the Supreme declines