Andreu Van den Eynde, lawyer acting for the defence of Oriol Junqueras and Raül Romeva, is interviewed in the National section of today’s paper.
Last week, the trial ended with a long statement by Trapero, the head of the Catalan police. How did you rate it?
The statement by Major Trapero confirms what we have been saying for ages. It dismantles the false story being built by the prosecution that the Mossos were somehow part of a plot to trigger violence. It destroys the lie that there was some tripartite conspiracy between the government, civil society and the Catalan police, and that there was control over the Mossos by government. The truth is that almost anyone with a shred of common sense believes Trapero’s reality.
That the Mossos were prepared to arrest Puigdemont and the government if ordered by a judge before the declaration of independence - doesn’t that attribute guilt to the Catalan government?
It does, and it might produce some pressure, but one must remember that in a trial, pressure doesn’t produce results on its own. There has to be a translation into actual penal, juridical action. And in this case, this cannot be deemed to justify charges of rebellion or sedition.
What do you think of the Spanish police forces’ position?
It in part comes from having to support a fiction, but also from a biased view. They have to stick to their story of violence because there is no other way of justifying their apocalyptic behaviour. On the other hand, they actually feel the referendum was violence against their core values.