site stats
Tuesday, May 24, 2022
HomeLatest NewsLet's look at the CNI judge

Let’s look at the CNI judge

It is the sovereign who decides on the right of exclusion

Carl Schmitt

Let me start by explaining that I could live in a country that has 32,000 square kilometers less, but not in a country where rights and freedoms have been curtailed by the very judges who are supposed to protect them. I will also clarify that I do not believe in God and therefore I cannot profess to believe in something as human as the CNI, because I know, like Le Carré, that spies are not angels or saints. I will also clarify that I believe that journalism has a fundamental sense of democratic balance and that it is designed to monitor and denounce abuses of power, which is why I am so overwhelmed by this blind desire to join a public body, which is an expression of the opaque power that some colleagues practice. Finally, I I will tell you that I believe that even if it is only out of “rational selfishness”, any attentive citizen should be interested in making sure that democratic control and the protection of constitutional rights in our territory are ensured so that this is not then followed by others, and one turns out to be a dissident who needs to be prosecuted.

With all this in mind, I have come to tell you that it is time to take a look at Judge Pablo Lucas Murillo and his deputy, Andrés Martínez-Arrieta, and the orders they signed allowing for the complete and utter violation of the privacy of at least 18 people, one of them a lawyer who oversees the progress of cases in his own court, and with him in the court of all his clients. I learn that the Supreme Court is “annoyed” that the above orders were shown in the State Secrets Commission. Says Maria Peral, who would never dare to dispute his superiority in the most eminent sources of the high court. This concern, which he attributes to sources in Chambers II and III of the TS – precisely the chambers to which the two CNI magistrates belong – is due to the “risks to which the intelligence service is exposed,” the “delicacy” of the matters it deals with. CNI and the total rejection that “record integrity” can be known even without declassification is very revealing. They never mention the word “fundamental rights” and this, in my opinion, puts the highest Spanish court and the magistrates, who are called upon to act as “guaranteeing judges” in the face of spy procedures, in an extremely uncomfortable position. Make no mistake, they do not play a leading role in a criminal investigation in this case. They are judges of constitutional guarantees, and this should be their main occupation. Aznar’s own law, which creates them, says this: the figure is invented because there is Article 18 of the Constitution.

Let’s get to the facts, but not before readers thank us for trying to jump from here to there to get data on the aforementioned cars, now that no source wants to use the phone and that everything needs to be handled while remaining under wraps. places for coffee or soda water. You will see how the journalists of this country end up either with nerves or without gallstones.

The first problem presented by the protocols signed by the CNI judge – we don’t know if they were all for the same reason, MPs didn’t have time to see everything, it was transparency after ten minutes – is the fact that, apparently, they authorized interference over the phone and did not infect software like Pegasus. “Phone tapping is the only way to avoid secession in Spain,” literally reads one of these resolutions. The fact is that the regulation of wiretapping by the Criminal Procedure Law differs from that provided for “installation of software that allows remote and telematic inspection at a distance and without the knowledge of its owner about the content.” This possibility is contained in section 588 septies a), which obliges the authorizing judge to be limited to specific crimes – terrorism, criminal organization, crimes against minors, crimes committed with the help of technology, and crimes against the Constitution and related to the defense of the state – since par. forces to indicate in the records the relevant devices, the scope of the measure, the form of access, the permission to copy, the measures to preserve the integrity of the data and the subsequent deletion – and NONE of this was included in the indicated vehicles. As for the type of crime, only a crime against the Constitution could be equated with spying on a pro-independent environment, although neither, because from the very ruling of the Supreme Court we know that there has never been a crime against the Constitution, but rather against a public order. How could you think that there would be a crime of rebellion at the end of 2019 or 2020? Did the agents of the magistrates deceive, or did the magistrates know that they were going to infiltrate the Pegasus, but did not appreciate its “intercepting” power?

This brings us to the arguments included in the minutes, signed by the Supreme Court judge, who is obliged to verify that they are not insane arguments, that he must apply the principle of likelihood, because if he does not only hide behind his sign the bet Arguments collected in machines, esoteric, not very rational and even childish. A judge cannot authorize a complete and systematic violation of the entire privacy of a citizen, vice president of the Generalitat, even allowing himself to be impersonated by sending messages or activating a camera in his private life, claiming that he may be a CDR coordinator. . One cannot have the faintest idea of ​​politics or current events, nor read the newspapers to pretend that Aragones and the ERC were the coordinators of the CDRs – they were distant and even argued about how to deal with the verdict – nor think that they were the head of any – some alleged unrest, which he himself had to suppress and control.

This is for not going to the length of an argument to intervene with a lawyer on the basis of an already expunged criminal record – with great respect for the principle of re-inclusion – and claiming that “he has made the international network of ETA available to Puigdemont”. With ETA, gentlemen, in 2019! From ETA! And it’s signed by a Supreme Court judge, because as evidence they offer him that a prestigious Belgian lawyer named Paul Bekaert also came to the defense of Puigdemont, who had some ETA member as an extradition client decades ago. It’s a shame to put that in a car, I’ve already told you that even the yellow pamphlets of the extreme right are capable of molding fakes with great success. This is not to mention the vague notion of “attacking Spain’s external image” as a legal argument. Does the image of Spain, whatever it may be, allow for the circumvention of the fundamental and constitutional rights of citizens, without giving them the slightest opportunity to defend themselves? Because look, this is a curious case where the judges who are supposed to protect rights approved such surreal things as those that were discussed, and it had to be the Canadian center, Citizen Lab, the one that has the most itching in defending Spanish constitutional rights. By the way, Paz Esteban herself, in her speech at the secret commission, rated this Toronto center as “serious” and stated that “they don’t marry anyone.” I say this to all representatives who have begun to question the honesty of a source that the service itself uses and takes for granted.

Territorial integrity above the Constitution? Is there a judge who, alone and outside of procedure, can declare a state of emergency for certain people without any control of the rule of law? Because that’s what these orders do, enforce the limitation of exclusive constitutional legality. One might think that yes, Carl Schmitt did it too when he said that “this is not a law, but an exception; he is not a judge, but a sovereign; not a cause, but a decision, since the judge and the norm are pushed beyond the limits of the norm. That’s right, Schmitt believed that when the Constitution is attacked, it is necessary to get out of it in order to repulse the attacker. I’m not spoiling you if I say that Schmitt became a Nazi and went to prison at the end of World War II.

So I don’t know if the “exasperated” and disastrous consequences of a complete declassification of the records are feared by the Supreme Court magistrates for their service or for themselves and for the role they may eventually play in this case if some Today, from a technical point of view, are dictated they weighed the resolutions. The truth is that even the socialists, who had complete confidence in Judge Lucas, were completely stunned when they got access to the machines.

Of course, we must go to the Supreme Court, as I told you in “The Judge” as an alibi, because if the judicial authorization of the activities of the CNI is a mere paripé, which is far from any triad of constitutional principles of interference with a citizen’s private life (appropriate, necessary, proportionate), then we are in the hands of a dark force, whoever has it, and without any constitutional parapet in front of it. So espionage solely for reasons of political ideology is possible. So it’s a simulacrum of the rule of law.

No Democrat can accept such a scenario, much less a progressive government that would be obligated to legislate to prevent this from happening again. First of all, by refusing to use such weapons as Pegasus, which are incompatible with a democratic state. Then the restructuring of the service in the image and likeness of other neighboring democracies.



Source: www.eldiario.es

*The article has been translated based on the content of www.eldiario.es. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!

*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.

*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!



RELATED ARTICLES

Most Popular

Recent Comments

%d bloggers like this: