Indignation and perplexity in the Supreme for the reinterpretation of the condemnation Congress to Alberto Rodríguez

Perplexity and indignation in the Supreme Court after the decision of the Congress Bureau to keep the deputy of We can Alberto Rodríguez with his seat despite t

Indignation and perplexity in the Supreme for the reinterpretation of the condemnation Congress to Alberto Rodríguez

Perplexity and indignation in the Supreme Court after the decision of the Congress Bureau to keep the deputy of We can Alberto Rodríguez with his seat despite the sentence imposed by the Second Chamber because he had a kick to an agent of authority during a manifestation. January 25, 2014, in the town of La Laguna, against the so-called Law Wert.

On October 7, the High Court condemned the Former Secretary of Organization of We can for a crime of attacking agents from authority to a month and a half prison, which replaced by a fine of 540 euros. The sentence understood the accessory penalty of special disqualification for the right of passive suffrage and, consequently, the loss of the seat for illegibility. In the ruling of the sentence, presentation of Magistrate Manuel Marchena, the notification of him to the Central Electoral Board "was agreed upon".

That is, the direct consequence of the firm sentence was that Rodríguez had to leave his seat in Congress, emphasize legal sources.

From United we can then question that this should be thus, highlighting that the prison would bring that disqualification to continue in the seat had been replaced by a fine and asked the Supreme to rectify through a clarification of judgment. The room responded to the defense of the deputy of we can not rectify any rectification because the fact of replacing the prison sentence for a fine does not exempt the condemnate of compliance with the accessory penalty.

Even so, the PSOE and united we can have allied this Tuesday at the Congress table to allow Rodríguez, he retains his deputy certificate under the report written by the Laws of the Chamber, unveiled yesterday by the world.

Since the High Court, this decision is qualified to be "very serious" since it is "reinterpreted by the will of the court" and that in "Firm sentence he argued that this man was disabled" for the right to passive suffrage.

Legal sources consulted emphasize that the precedent established by Congress with this decision is "very dangerous" and regret that the decision of the Congress table is a kind of appeal for the judgment of the Chamber.

Updated Date: 20 October 2021, 05:31

You need to login to comment.

Please register or login.

RELATED NEWS