A defence of “privilege”

The former Standing Committee of Parliament yesterday defended its actions before the Supreme Court judge, Pablo Llarena claiming that parliamentary immunity afforded by the concept of “privilege”, protected them in their decision to allow the proposed law that would allow the October 1 referendum to be debated by parliament. Four members of the former Committee, Lluís Guinó, Lluís Maria Corominas, Anna Simó and Joan Josep Nuet were apearing before LLarena, while Ramona Barrufet who was also scheduled to appear by videoconference, eventually postponed her appearance due to reasons of health. All face charges under a crime of disobedience, which is punishable by disqualification from public office.

The appearance of the defendants was brief and they simply reiterated their initial defence. Nuet’s appearance was longer as his defence adds the factor that although he voted in favour of allowing the bill to be debated in the parliament, he in fact voted against the passing of the bill once it was on the floor of the House. He also added in his defence: “We are not criminals, we did not disobey the Constitutional Court. All we did was to allow Parliament to debate an issue which has divided Catalan society ... to prohibit such a debate would have been incomprehensible.”

Today the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear evidence from the other defendants who are not in presently in prison or in exile: Carles Mundó, Meritxell Borràs and Santi Vila, who are all accused of misuse of public funds and disobedience, and the leader of the CUP, Mireia Boya who is only charged with disobedience.