The National Court revokes the third degree of ETA member Juan Carlos Subijana for considering it premature

Observes "advance" in forgiveness to victims but insufficient and recommends restorative justice program

MADRID, 28 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The prison surveillance judge has revoked the third degree granted by the Basque Government to ETA member Juan Carlos Subijana, considering that it is premature because, although he observes a "progress" in the way of asking for forgiveness from his victims, he believes, in line with the Ministry Prosecutor, who in some way continues to "politically" legitimize terrorist activity, which is why he also recommends that I participate in a restorative justice program."

This is stated in an order dated February 22, to which Europa Press has had access, where Judge María Reyes Jimeno estimates the appeal filed by the Prosecutor's Office against the agreement adopted on August 11 by the Basque Government's Vice-Ministry of Justice by which he agreed to Subijana's progression to third grade.

The magistrate recalls that "he is convicted of a very serious crime (murder) and a crime of damages to a total of 28 years in prison, he still has a long period of serving the imposed sentence pending, since he has not served three-quarters, which will not expire until 2028, and final compliance is not foreseen until the year 2035, for which 12 years of compliance are missing".

In addition, it alludes to the two letters made by Subijana, the most recent on October 30, to apologize to the victims of his terrorist actions, assessing that they represent "an important treatment advance" because they do not respond "to the stereotyped writing scheme and ambiguous" of the ETA prisoners, given that in his case "he specifically mentions his victim and family members".

However, it accepts the arguments of the Public Prosecutor's Office, which observes that "certain expressions that he uses in his brief denote a lack of sufficient overcoming of the aspects discussed that makes it necessary to continue working on the deficits that led the inmate to commit a crime."

"Obtaining permits is not a point of arrival, but a transcendent moment of a behavioral evolution that culminates in the third degree," underlines the Public Ministry in its report, cited by the prison surveillance judge.

Specifically, the Prosecutor's Office indicates that "the document provided contains a reference to 'violence to achieve political objectives', which politically legitimizes terrorist activity"; that "the mention of the 'organization in which he was a member' clearly obviates its definition as a terrorist organization"; and that he speaks of "terrorist activity as 'armed struggle'".

The Prosecutor's Office also perceives "a certain equidistance in its reference to 'all the victims'", all of which would reveal "that the foundations of their criminal acts have not been sufficiently addressed and modified to date."

The magistrate also points out as a negative factor in this context that "there is no record of the participation of the prisoner in restorative justice programs that can corroborate the sincerity of the repentance and contrast the favorable evolution that has been pointing out."

To this he adds that "the proposal of the Treatment Board is not unanimous but majority"; the "recent start of enjoying ordinary exit permits in April 2022"; and that, "although he is paying the civil liability imposed, the payment at the time of the contested degree review was very low in proportion to the amount owed (...), as reflected in the proposal of the Treatment Board itself and that consigns the payment of 210 euros".

The judge takes advantage of the Subijana case to recall that "progression to the third degree is nothing more than the relationship between the normal mechanisms for controlling the progress of the inmate in the ordinary regime or second degree, granting him a wider space of freedom, which obviously it should not be done if it is not with a certain guarantee of success in the use of that margin of confidence and a reasonable prospect of not misusing it".