Eulàlia Reguant (CUP) appeals to the Constitutional Court her conviction for not answering Vox in the trial of the 'process'

He assures that his fundamental rights have been violated and that there has been "collusion of the judiciary with the extreme right"

MADRID, 7 Dic. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The deputy of the CUP in the Parliament of Catalonia Eulàlia Reguant has submitted an appeal for protection before the Constitutional Court against the sentence of the Supreme Court which sentenced her to a fine of 13,500 euros for a crime of serious disobedience to the authority by refusing to answer to the questions of the popular accusation of Vox during the trial of the 'process', where he appeared as a witness in February 2019.

In the appeal, to which Europa Press has had access, the CUP leader has alleged that her fundamental rights have been violated, specifically, the right to effective judicial protection and the presumption of innocence, the right to criminal legality, the right to freedom of expression and the right to ideological freedom and conscience.

In 34 pages, Reguant's defense has ensured that in his case there has been "collusion of the judiciary with the extreme right" and has underlined the fact that he is punished for doing what he has considered a "conscientious objection" to responding to the popular accusation exercised by Vox in the trial of the 'procés'.

Reguant's appeal takes place after the Supreme Court magistrates dismissed sentencing him to four months in prison and disqualification, as requested by the Prosecutor's Office, considering that there were no reasons to opt for the most serious penalty provided by law in this case, especially for the consequences that she would have in her condition as deputy, which --in the court's opinion-- would exceed the principle of proportionality of the sentence.

In the sentence, to which he had access by Europa Press, the court concluded that the pertinent thing was to sentence Reguant to a nine-month fine with a daily fee of fifty euros, which translates into 13,500 euros.

The Supreme Court stressed that the refusal of the CUP leader to comply with the mandate of the 'procés' court was "evident", "unequivocal", "clear and patent". As he explained, Reguant's attitude "clearly crossed the limits of her ideological freedom and conscience."

The magistrates considered that the parliamentary deputy was not facing a "lawful exercise of freedom of expression, clearly limited in this case to guarantee the authority and impartiality of the judiciary." And they have also recalled that it is the obligation of witnesses to abide by the "legitimate orders given by the courts."

Thus, the court emphasized that "there is no general right of disobedience backed by any constitutional or legal provision." In this sense, the magistrates pointed out that the criminal complaint against Reguant is not based on his ideological position, but rather "is aimed at the duty of collaboration with justice, and respect for the principle of authority and public order."

In the sentence, the court stressed that Reguant's opposition to answering was "stubborn", "fully thought out and determined", with an attitude of open and stubborn refusal to assume the duties that the law imposes on witnesses.

For the Supreme Court, the disobedience of the leader is of "particular gravity" because it not only violates the principle of authority, but also indirectly affects "the proper functioning of the Administration of Justice, public order and the right to defense."

In this sense, the court recalled that Vox was a "duly represented" accusation and that Reguant's refusal without knowing the content of his questions, "even though his ideology does not coincide with or totally contrary to that of the party", does not justify his attidude.