The Supreme Court will address the exhumation of Franco if, prior to endorse their urgency

The Supreme suspends unanimously the exhumation of Franco what Is a royal decree, provisions for cases of urgent need, the appropriate instrument to remove the

The Supreme Court will address the exhumation of Franco if, prior to endorse their urgency
The Supreme suspends unanimously the exhumation of Franco

what Is a royal decree, provisions for cases of urgent need, the appropriate instrument to remove the remains of Franco from the Valley of the Fallen? The first question that will have to be discussed by the judges of the Fourth Section of the Contentious-Administrative of the Supreme Court that morning meet to deliberate on the appeal of the family of Franco against the decision of the Executive of Pedro Sanchez to exhume the dictator. It was confirmed by sources at the High Court consulted by ABC, for whom the answer to this question, raised in the notice of the Franc, will determine the rest of the debate on a day marked by the dissolution of the Courts and the decree of convocation of the elections to the next 10th of November. Whatever the decision of the board, come packed in pre-campaign, six months after the Government's promise to take Franco from the Valley of the Fallen on the 10th of June of this year.

If the judges question the instrument used by the Government of Sanchez will need to pose your questions to the Constitutional Court and may not, therefore, enter into the merits of the case. is Only if you endorse that royal decree, and therefore, his "extraordinary and urgent need", will be able to continue on with the discussion on the exhumation and the fate that is given to the remains of the dictator, that the family wants to take to the cathedral of the Almudena and the Government to the graveyard of Mingorrubio, in the Pardo, for "reasons of security and public order".

Prohibition the family

as Well as the exhumation does not seem like it's going to divide the Room, forming six judges of different sensitivities, chaired by Jorge Rodríguez Zapata, the unanimity in what regards the destination of the remains seems to be more difficult . The sources cited above argue that judges do not have to decide where to inhuma the dictator, but to "rule on whether it is in accordance with the law that prohibits the family to bury the body in the cathedral". What has to prevail, the desire of the family or reasons of security (public interest) to appeal the Executive?

What is certain is that don't expect a clear-cut pronouncement on the part of the judges on the right that appeals to the family, and once exhumed, bury the dictator where it deems appropriate. And this to the point that the Supreme court could even determine the fate of the dictator to the designs of the catholic Church.

In the course of this procedure, the family presented an expert who sounded the alarm of the risk of desecration and vandalism that would lead to the burial of the remains of Franco in El Pardo in front of your location in La Almudena, an area that, in your judgment, the most secure and protected policialmente. Do not share this opinion, the Law of the State, alert the risk of clashes between extremist groups and remember the attempted attack in 2013 at the Spanish grand prix at the hands of a group of anarchists.

last June 3, the Chamber decided to paralyze confiscate the exhumation agreed by the Council of Ministers until it had a final judgment on the merits of the case, since otherwise it could be "extraordinarily harmful not only for appellants, but also to the public interest by the unique and special circumstances of this case." In the opinion of the court, that would lead to "a serious disruption to the public interests embodied in the State and its constitutional institutions, taking into account the significance of don Francisco Franco".

Were the judges that "the fact that out head of State since the 1 of October of 1936 [three months after the start of the Civil War] until his death on 20 November 1975, attributed to all the controversy about special traits that can't be ignored and that allow to give a prejudice irreversible to the execution of the decision of the Council of Ministers to exhume his remains, if this, then, is deemed contrary to the Law" .

three Other resources

in Addition to the family, currently in the Supreme there is pending judgment other three appeals against the royal decree approved by the Council of Ministers: the benedictine abbey known as cuelgamuros, the Fundación Francisco Franco and of the Association for the Defence of the Valley of the Fallen. The Supreme debate, closed-door morning of the grandchildren of the dictator because it is the most advanced in their processing and the most controversial points it raises. The decision of the judges will mark the destiny of others.

Updated Date: 23 Eylül 2019, 19:01

ABC ES

ABC ES

Yorum yapabilmek için üye girişi yapmanız gerekmektedir.

Üye değilseniz hemen üye olun veya giriş yapın.

RELATED NEWS