Junts accuses ERC of being "ridiculous" with the penal reform and the CUP makes their "naivete" ugly

Rufián defends that agreeing is never "useless" and says that you cannot "change" the Judiciary but you can try to "make it more difficult"

MADRID, 14 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Junts spokesperson in Congress, Miriam Nogueras, has assured this Tuesday that the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the sentences of the leaders of the 'procés' shows that ERC has made a "ridicule" by agreeing with the Government on the reform of the Cógido Criminal that suppressed the crime of sedition and reduced the penalties of embezzlement, while from the CUP Mireia Vehí has ​​pointed to the "naivety" with which, in her opinion, those of Oriol Junqueras have acted on this issue.

This is how both have pronounced when asked about the order issued by the Supreme Court that maintains the sentence of 13 years of disqualification for the president of Esquerra, in such a way that he will not be able to aspire to any public office before 2031.

At a press conference in Congress, Nogueras stressed that the decision of the Supreme Court has shown that "agreeing with the State is useless", which only leads to "being ridiculous", to verify that the way of the table of dialogue on Catalonia is "dead" and to confirm that "the only possible one is that of independence".

"You have to be very delusional to believe that you can win in the opposite field when the referee is Manuel Marchena (president of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court," he told ERC, which he has demanded, just like the commoners that " do not complain" because the penal reform was approved as they proposed. "The Supreme Court has played the Supreme Court, the PSOE played the PSOE and the ERC played the ERC," he summarized.

On his side, Vehí considers the Supreme Court's decision "obvious", which he has referred to as "the government of the robes." Thus, he has criticized the PSOE, for being "candid" and "irresponsible", and has added that ERC "sinned naiveté" for agreeing to a reform that maintained that what happened on October 1, 2017 was a crime and left the "door open to make embezzlement the new workhorse".

"A reform was made so that the Judiciary does not cry out to heaven and it turns out that it cries out to heaven and redoubles the bet," he stressed, before pointing out that "it does not make sense to legislate with lead feet when in front of the Second Chamber of the Supreme is Manuel Marchena". For all this, he has demanded that "the right of self-determination be guaranteed to stand up to the judicial leadership."

For his part, the ERC spokesman, Gabriel Rufián, has said that he has assumed that his formation cannot "change" the Spanish Judiciary but can "try to make it difficult for them" and has defended that "it is never useless" to dialogue, agree and negotiate to For example, change the Penal Code.

Rufián has indicated that this matter still has a "tour". "There is a party, Europe remains", he pointed out, also stressing that the penal reform was designed "for future generations" and that imprisoning leaders of the 'procés' such as Junqueras did not serve to have "less independentistas"

In addition, he has confessed that he has not been "surprised" by the Supreme Court's decision or that the PSOE uses it to say that the PP was lying about the penal reform. Of course, she has taken the opportunity to attack the politicians of Catalonia who, according to her, "see politics as if they were spectators of a movie", instead of acting.

PDeCAT: "FORCED INTERPRETATION" OF THE LAW

From the PDeCAT, Genís Boadella, whose formation also supported the penal reform, has welcomed the fact that the Supreme Court has "confirmed" that there has been an "authentic repeal" of the crime of sedition, but regretted that it did not take into account the " will of the legislator" regarding embezzlement reform.

And it is that, in his opinion, the Supreme Court has made a "forced interpretation" by assuming the disappearance of the "main" crime - sedition - but maintaining the maximum penalty for an "accessory" crime - embezzlement -. According to Boadella, this shows that the Transition is still "pending" in the Judiciary, which continues "forcing the interpretation of the laws."