The open letter , signed by highly-respected academics and members of the European Parliament, cited Spain’s “undisputable abuse of power”.
We are deeply concerned that the EU’s governing bodies are condoning the systematic violation of the Rule of Law in Spain, in particular regarding the Spanish central authorities’ approach to the 1 October referendum on Catalan independence. We do not take political sides on the substance of the dispute on territorial sovereignty and we are cognizant of procedural deficiencies in the organization of the referendum. Our concern is with the Rule of Law as practised by an EU Member State.
The Spanish government has justified its actions on grounds of upholding or restoring the constitutional order.
- The Tribunal has violated Constitutional provisions on freedom of peaceful assembly and of speech – the two principles which are embodied by referendums and parliamentary deliberations irrespective of their subject matter. Without interfering in Spanish constitutional disputes or in Spain’s penal code, we note that it is a travesty of justice to enforce one constitutional provision by violating fundamental rights. Thus, the Tribunal’s judgments and the Spanish government’s actions for which these judgments provided a legal basis violate both the spirit and letter of the Rule of Law.
- In the days preceding the referendum, the Spanish authorities undertook a series of repressive actions against civil servants, MPS, mayors, media, companies and citizens. The shutdown of Internet and other telecom networks during and after the referendum campaign had severe consequences on exercising freedom of expression.
- On referendum day, the Spanish police engaged in excessive force and violence against peaceful voters and demonstrators – according to Human Rights Watch. Such disproportionate use of force is an undisputable abuse of power in the process of law enforcement.
- The arrest and imprisonment on 16 October of the activists Jordi Cuixart and Jordi Sànchez (Presidents, respectively, of the Catalan National Assembly and Omnium Cultural) on charges of sedition is a miscarriage of justice. The facts resulting in this incrimination cannot possibly be qualified as sedition, but rather as the free exercise of the right to peaceful public manifestation, codified in article 21 of the Spanish Constitution.
Rule of Law
The rule of law implies also the safeguarding of fundamental rights and freedoms – norms which render the law binding not simply because it is procedurally correct but enshrines justice. It is the Rule of Law, thus understood, that provides legitimacy to public authority in liberal democracies. We therefore call on the Commission to examine the situation in Spain under the Rule of Law framework, as it has done previously for other Member States.
The EU leadership has reiterated that violence cannot be an instrument in politics, yet it has implicitly condoned the actions of the Spanish police and has deemed the actions of the Spanish government to be in line with the Rule of Law. Such a reductionist, maimed version of the Rule of Law should not become Europe’s new political common sense.
The EU leadership has reiterated that violence cannot be an instrument in politics, yet it has implicitly condoned the actions of the Spanish police and has deemed the actions of the Spanish government to be in line with the Rule of Law.
The Spanish government, in its efforts to safeguard the sovereignty of the state and indivisibility of the nation, has violated basic rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as by Articles 2 and 6 of the basic law of the EU (the Lisbon Treaty). The violation of basic rights and freedoms protected by international and EU law cannot be an internal affair of any government. The silence of the EU and its rejection of inventive mediation is unjustifiable.
Bingo
There are fundamental rights of every human being that exceed the rights of constitution. Had the same action occurred outside the EU, Jean-Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk, and Mariano Rajoy would have been among the first in line to take a position.
Instead, the EU hypocrites, claim this is an internal affair and the use of force was justified. Take a look at the “justified force” of the Madrid thugs.
Dear @JunckerEU :
Article 7 of the European Union Treaty
“Suspension of any Member State that uses military force on its own population.”
Please share.#SpainOutOfEU#ShameOnSpain#CatalanReferendum pic.twitter.com/WUfBoAf75N— Liz Castro (@lizcastro) October 1, 2017
In a democracy it is not normal to beat people up and break their fingers on purpose and attack emergency workers because they want to vote.
— Liz Castro (@lizcastro) October 2, 2017
If this were North Korea or Iran the UN would already be implementing sanctions.
— Paul Smyth 🇺🇦🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈He/Him (@pauldsmyth) October 2, 2017
This *is* my country. I live here, have children here, pay taxes here, belong here. AND I have the right to defend democracy everywhere.
— Liz Castro (@lizcastro) October 2, 2017
What a sorry, sorry joke.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
@Medex_Man I don’t think Mish does care what the academics think. He cares what the politicians do. The politicians don’t care what the academics think, and they certainly don’t care for morality. They care to be seen taking the moral high ground. When “thought leaders” publicly denounce their actions as “morally inferior” then they become more motivated. Make no mistake – this letter is an important political play and prevents the EU from stepping in on Spain’s side. If there are another dozen equivalent events, the EU may have to recognise Catalonia’s independence.
More fake news nonsense. The deep source of this bs is the sense of superiority of british and americans towards Spain and the deep hatred towards the European Union.
Seriously Mish, even if this gets me banned from your “Catalonia and robot cars forever blog” — your suggestion that my comment yesterday was “an Ad-Hominem attack” is really offensive. It shows you don’t really understand what the Catalonians are fighting about in the first place. Rajoy is not some God appointed expert on all things, and neither are these arrogant academics. Everyone else’s opinion counts too, and if anything, those of us living and working in the real world (and paying taxes to support the government AND academia) should have our opinions count more than these cloistered academic pricks. Ban me if it makes you feel more important than you are Mish, ban me if you think it makes you seem powerful, but you pretty much announced to the world that you don’t get it. The elitist arrogance, and poorly concealed contempt for the average person, that is why the EU is coming apart, it is why Trump won the election against all the established arrogance, and its why more and more business owners have stopped recruiting at “enlightened” universities as we learn their graduates are brainwashed cult members who can’t do simple math.
typo — the academics are less in TOUCH with how EU regulations effect the average EU citizen.
And I was, if anything, being polite. The academics are aloof and out of touch, arguing about pie in the sky theoretical nonsense — while the average citizen suffers under real world taxes.
Mish — why is the opinion of a bunch of academics worth so much more (to you) than the opinions of so many others? What makes these windbags “experts”? This is no different from arguments in the USA, where the Kardasians (or some other “actors” from hollywood) start to opine about politics or science or some subject other than acting. Why does being an actor, and quite frankly being lucky (and it is luck) to get a script for a movie that sells well, somehow make that actor into an expert on all subjects? In the same vein, why are the opinions of these academics somehow more enlightened or more informed than the millions of other EU voters? Who signed up for this arrogance and elitism?
And please tell, why do you think so little of everyone else? By elevating the arrogant few, you are indirectly diminishing the rest of us who actually have to pay for all this nonsense.
I did address the veracity of the academics arguments. Their opinion is no better or worse than 100 custodians or 100 McDonalds workers — and quite frankly Mish, I think the McDonalds employees have a far better grasp of how the EU is effecting everyday life for the average EU resident. Academics live a sheltered and protected life on campus, and if anything, are less in tough with how EU regulations effect the average EU citizen.
Mish, please explain why you believe 100 academics, with tenure and protected salaries and protected benefits and cushy jobs, somehow have a more valid opinion about the EU than the millions of people who’s paychecks are not protected, who’s jobs are not protected, who’s benefits are not protected?
Look who just tacked 4 theses on Martin Luther’s door.
?uk In Youth Spanish Many So Why ?High Living Of Standard Spanish .ni In haring Power
@Mish yeah Mish care to explain why must “respected” scholars are from the UK? For a second I was under the impression that the Brits had voted their contempt for all things EU. So I wonder what all these “respected” scholars are going to do when they realized that the EU doesn’t care about what NON-EU members think or say. Oh wait I know, just like the “independistas” they want out but with the benefits of still being in. The Brits (the general population that is) will soon discover how their leaders lead them to a worst living standard. BTW can you ask these “respected” scholars to compare how the UK handled Northern Ireland vs how Rajoy is handling the “independistas”? Or closer to home yet why aren’t you writing about Trump asking the FBI to investigate (albeit informally via twits) his political enemies in clear violation of the law? Oh yeah you voted for the guy…
Interesting to note that many of the signators are British. Not sure that Juncker or Tusk are much inclined to listen to them.
I am prompted by the Medex_Man/Mish exchange above to comment.
Presenting the ideas in the letter under cover of 100 names of individuals apparently well-qualified to give weighty opinions is to invite ad hominem attack: if the ideas alone were sufficient, why buttress them with a long list of names? (I only recognized two names, both distinguished but not as jurists and less able, it is reasonable to suppose, in Spanish law than Spanish judges.)
As for the letter’s ideas, it expressly acknowledges that “Issues of national sovereignty are indeed a matter of domestic politics in liberal democracies”. Well quite! (And why is that qualified by reference to only liberal democracies?). The letter’s authors’ objection is not about the issues but runs to “the manner in which the Spanish authorities have been handling the claims…”.
Substance is given to those objections through asserting that Spain has compromised “freedom of peaceful assembly and of speech – the two principles which are embodied by referendums and parliamentary deliberations irrespective of their subject matter”. Whilst it is of course true that those principles are so embodied (and in other forms too), the authors rely upon the notion that any action cloaked in referendum or parliamentary deliberation must then be acceptable. That is patently absurd, illustrated when an executive (Puigdemont and his chancers) has deliberately and knowingly acted outside the law by abusing parliamentary process and rules to deliver a referendum the aim of which was sedition. Any state (including and perhaps especially liberal democracies) is entitled under law to act against those who would overthrow it and just because its opponents have hitherto participated in democratic elections rather than originated as guerilla fighters come down from the mountains does not invalidate such entitlement. If that is accepted, the other objections in the letter (numbered 2,3, an 4) fall away.
That the EU is being pusillanimous and hypocritical is of course not news.
LOL….
“They hate us for our freedoms.”
Medix – Refute the argument instead of making an Ad-Hominem attack. Academics are not always wrong. Sometimes I agree with Krugman. If you cannot refute what they said, then why shouldn’t you agree with it? You offered no rebuttal, just an attack on academics.
Jon Gruber is an academic from MIT, and was paid $500,000 consulting fee to screw over the USA with Obamacare. Little bast@rd went further and said his fellow citizens were stupid and we wouldn’t realize we are getting screwed (true for Obama supporters at least!). Gruber was so greedy with a second consulting gig (for Vermont) that VT took him to court and refused to pay him.
Academics can’t be trusted. They charge obscene tuition; most of them teach only one course per semester (and try to pass this off as a full course load!); and instead of doing low quality research, they spend their free time “consulting” outside their college — getting paid for two or more full time jobs when they are barely even working one.
I understand Mish’s concern with Spain… but academics are not respectable anymore. A generation ago, perhaps. But today, they are no better than Rajoy or Obama or Clinton. THe title should read: “100 whiney academics with severe conflicts of interest call kettle black”
It ok’s violence by an EU state against its own citizens. Not Policing, violence. A terrible precedent.’s
I think, in time this will be a serious blow to the EU. This case will be cited in the future, and already is. It does not invoke a public response elsewhere because Puigdemont is probably not a very inspiring character, just plain wanted negotiations: he could have become a Robin Hood, but he doesn’t have it in him.
Verhofstadt should keep his mouth shut too.
The EU is against ordinary people in defence of the construct supported by an oppressive member state. There is no excuse to condone the violence – none. Nothing changes. Fascism lives on.
Both Junker and Tusk are.What a sorry, sorry joke.