Posted on

AED/EDL IN SUPPORT OF THE SPANISH LAWYERS ISABEL ELBAL AND GONZALO BOYE

AED/EDL would like to proclaim its support for our colleagues, the Spanish lawyers Gonzalo Boye and Isabel Elbal, concerning the suspicious attacks they have suffered in their offices, which have been burglarized twice in 9 months, stating the following:

1.- First and foremost, we must recall that lawyers should not be identified with their clients, or with the causes they defend, since such confusion is detrimental to the independence and dignity of lawyers and the whole legal profession, and ultimately affects the right of defense itself as a fundamental right.

This circumstance was already acknowledged in The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, approved at the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held in Havana (Cuba), from the 27th of August to the 7th of September 1990, which establishes in its guarantee n° 18 that “Lawyers will not be identified with their clients or with the causes of their clients as a consequence of the performance of their duties”. Furthermore Resolution 26/7 (10th july 2014) of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC- A/HRC/RES/26/7) (2) provides in its point n° 104 that “It must be prohibited to assimilate lawyers and their clients or their causes and to express anticipation for the adoption of measures aimed at preventing such assimilation“.

 

2.- Regardless of the foregoing, we express our most outright rejection of all the intimidating, threatening or humiliating messages that lawyers have been receiving in recent times due to their practice of the legal profession, and specifically in the case of our colleagues because of their work as defense lawyers of clients linked to the so-called Catalonian “procés”. Likewise, we strongly reject such illegitimate attacks, and show our solidarity and support to the recipients.

 

3.- We reiterate the need for legal professionals, and specifically lawyers, to be able to develop their constitutional function with the most absolute freedom and autonomy, without which, it is impossible to speak of the rule of law and of the existence of fair trials without discrimination.

 

 

Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Brussels, Amsterdam

3rd of October 2020

Posted on

THE CATALAN REFERENDUM TRIAL

After gathering in Madrid on the morning of February 9th, 2019 and discussing the impending Catalan Referendum Trial, which will begin in the Spanish Supreme Court on February 12th, 2019, Avocats Européens Democrates-European Democratic Lawyers (AED-EDL) has reached the following CONCLUSIONS:

1.- There is concern that all the procedural guarantees may not be met during the trial, due to the following reasons:

– The first trial session (February 12th) was set on February 1st. This does not give enough time for the defence teams to prepare properly.

–  The different defence teams do not have full access to the total information on the trial. For instance, they do not know the identity of the police officers who will testify during the hearings, only their identification numbers.

–  Most of the witnesses during the trial will be police officers. Several of the witnesses proposed by the defence teams have been rejected by the Court.

–  Nine out of the twelve defendants are in pre-trial detention and have been in this situation for several months, which clearly difficults the preparation for the hearings. They are currently being held in prisons in Madrid, hundreds of kilometres away from their defence attorneys and families.

–  There are three accusing parties in this trial: the State Prosecutor, the State Attorney and the far right-wing political party, Vox; each of them with their own accusation and agenda.

2.- There is concern regarding the prohibition of arbitrary detention:

–  We call for the immediate release of the nine defendants in pre-trial detention. We believe they are in prison due to political reasons and call for this situation to stop1.

–  In regards to the imprisoned elected officials, we would like to point out that the recent European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey judgment, issued on 20 November 2018, concluded that Turkey had violated Article 18 of the Convention (limitation on use of restrictions on rights, i.e., the said rights and freedoms shall not be applied for any purpose other than those for which they have been prescribed) and the right to vote and hold office, with regards to Demirtaş’ pre-trial detention. There is an undeniable similarity to the case of the imprisoned elected officials.

– The nine defendants who are in pre-trial imprisonment will be transferred daily back and forth from the prisons they are being held at to the Court. This implies waking up at 6 am on a daily basis, travelling during at least two hours a day, and being held in separate quarters during breaks in each session. This will happen on a daily basis for three months. It can have negative implications on the ability to defend oneself. The conditions of transport from Catalan prisons to the detention centres in Madrid have been denounced in the past on the basis of being mocked and ill-treated by police officers3. We would like to remind the public that the ECHR in the recent Mariya Alekinha and others v Russia judgment4, the Court considered that the conditions of the applicants’ transport to and from the trial hearings exceeded the minimum level of severity and amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

3.- There is concern regarding the interpretation of the right to peaceful assembly carried out by all of the accusations (State Prosecutor, State Attorney and far right-wing political party Vox):

– A non-restrictive interpretation of what is “violence” is extremely dangerous for our fundamental rights and civil liberties. One must tread carefully on these grounds.

– According to the accusations, on September 20th, 2017, thousands of people gathered on the street, in a demonstration, which blocked the work the police was carrying out and resulted in damages in two police cars. These events, according to the prosecuting parties, warrants charges of rebellion or sedition, which can imply prison sentences that could reach up to 25 years per defendant.

– If what took place on this date was an act of peaceful civil disobedience, as all defence teams claim (something which shall be determined during the outcome of the trial), we believe that any conviction could result in a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights.

4.- This is not a Spanish affair, but a European one, which can have serious effects on the rule of law. If peaceful civil disobedience is criminalized, all social movements in Europe must fear for their future existence.

5.- There is concern regarding the right to a fair trial:

–  Members of the Supreme Court are elected by the Government of Judges (CGPJ), which is elected by the Spanish Parliament. This can have a serious effect on the independence and political inclinations of different magistrates.

–  We challenge the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to try this case instead of the natural judge.

– The fact that the defendants are being tried in the Supreme Court eliminates the possibility of appealing. An eventual conviction would have to be taken up to the Constitutional Court, with the procedural limitations this presents.

Bearing all these facts in mind, the AED-EDL believes it is of vital importance that a well- informed and respectful of the Spanish judicial system international observation is carried out during the entire duration of the trial. Therefore, members of AED-EDL from different European countries will be traveling to Madrid during the following months in order to attend hearings, engage with other international observers and study in depth the legal aspects of the Catalan Referendum Case from a Human Rights perspective.

In Madrid, on February 9th, 2019

 

Download this press statement as pdf

Posted on

Harcèlement des Avocats

Les avocats européens démocrates (A.E.D.) expriment leur préoccupation et indignation face au harcèlement que subissent les avocats Paul Bekaert (Belgique), Michèle Hirsch (Belgique), Christophe Marchand (Belgique) et Gonzalo Boye (Espagne) en guise de représailles pour leur défense performante de l’ancien président catalan Carles Puigdemont et des membres de son gouvernement Clara Ponsati, Lluis Puig, Meritxell Serret et Antoni Comín.

 

Après avoir eu accès aux informations relatives à cette affaire, il est apparu que les avocats concernés ont été victimes de manifestations de haine et déclarations diffamatoires portant ateinte à leur réputation et à l’indépendance avec laquelle ils doivent exercer leur profession. Des menaces contre leur intégrité physique ont également été proférées.

 

Ces actes constituent une atteinte intolérable à l’exercice des Droits de la défense et aux droits reconnus par les articles 11.1 de la Déclaration Universelle des Droits de l’Homme, 14.3.b) et d) du Pacte international relatif aux Droits civils et politiques et 6 de la Convention européenne de sauvegarde des Droits de l’Homme et des Libertés Fondamentales.

 

Ils portent atteinte en outre, aux Principes de base relatifs au rôle du barreau, adoptés par le huitième Congrès des Nations Unies pour la prévention du crime et le traitement des délinquants tenu à La Havane du 27 août au 7 septembre 1990 (Garanties liées à l’exercice de la profession d’avocat:

16. Les pouvoirs publics veillent à ce que les avocats a) puissent s’acquitter de toutes leurs fonctions professionnelles sans entrave, intimidation, harcèlement ni ingérence indue; b) puissent voyager et consulter leurs clients librement, dans le pays comme à l’étranger; et c) ne fassent pas l’objet, ni ne soient menacés de poursuites ou de sanctions économiques ou autres pour toutes mesures prises conformément à leurs obligations et normes professionnelles reconnues et à leur déontologie.

 

17. Lorsque la sécurité des avocats est menacée dans l’exercice de leurs fonctions, ils doivent être protégés comme il convient par les autorités.

 

18. Les avocats ne doivent pas être assimilés à leurs clients ou à la cause de leurs clients du fait de l’exercice de leurs fonctions.).

 

La Recommandation n° R(2000)21 du Comité des Ministres aux États membres sur la liberté d’exercice de la profession d’avocat s’est prononcée en faveur des mêmes principes

(Principe I – Principes généraux concernant la liberté d’exercice de la profession d’avocat 1. Toutes les mesures nécessaires devraient être prises pour respecter, protéger et promouvoir la liberté d’exercice de la profession d’avocat sans discrimination ni intervention injustifiée des autorités ou du public, notamment à la lumière des dispositions pertinentes de la Convention européenne de Droits de l’Home.).

 

En effet, les Droits de la défense ne sont pas seulement garantis par la présence d’un avocat, mais aussi et surtout par son libre choix et la garantie qu’il pourra exercer sa mission sans être menacé, perturbé, contraint ou dénoncé pour avoir déployé la stratégie de défense qu’il considère la plus appropriée au cas et au moment concret.

 

L’A.E.D. exige que ce genre d’attaques cesse et s’adresse aux Barreaux correspondants pour exhorter les autorités espagnoles à adopter les mesures appropriées pour que ces avocats soient protégés dans l’exercice de leur profession.

 

Colmar, 3 septembre 2018.

La Abogados Europeos Demócratas (A.E.D.) expresan su preocupación y indignación frente al acoso que sufren los abogados Paul Bekaert (Bélgica), Michèle Hirsch (Bélgica), Christophe Marchand (Bélgica) y Gonzalo Boye (España) en guisa de represalia por su eficiente defensa del ex Presidente Catalán Carles Puigdemont y los miembros de su gobierno Clara Ponsati, Lluis Puig, Meritxell Serret y Antoni Comín.

 

Tras haber tenido accesos à informaciones relativas a este asunto, se ha podido comprobar que los abogados concernidos han sido víctimas de manifestaciones de odio y declaraciones difamatorias atacando su reputación y la independencia con la que deben ejercer su profesión. Amenazas contra su integridad física han sido igualmente proferidas.

 

Estos actos constituyen un ataque intolerable contra el ejercicio de los Derechos de la defensa y contra los derechos reconocidos en los artículos 11.1 de la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos, 14.3.b) y d) del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos y 6 del Convenio Europeo para la Protección de los Derechos Humanos y de las Libertades Fundamentales.

 

Estos hechos atentan además contra los Principios Básicos sobre la Función de los Abogados, aprobados por el VIII Congreso de Naciones Unidas sobre Prevención del Delito y Tratamiento del Delincuente, celebrado en La Habana, del 27 de agosto al 7 de septiembre de 1.990 (Garantías para el ejercicio de la profesión:

16. Los gobiernos garantizarán que los abogados a) puedan desempeñar todas sus funciones profesionales sin intimidaciones, obstáculos, acosos o interferencias indebidas; b) puedan viajar y comunicarse libremente con sus clientes tanto dentro de su país como en el exterior; y c) no sufran ni estén expuestos a persecuciones o sanciones administrativas, económicas o de otra índole a raíz de cualquier medida que hayan adoptado de conformidad con las obligaciones, reglas y normas éticas que se reconocen a su profesión.

 

17. Cuando la seguridad de los abogados sea amenazada a raíz del ejercicio de sus funciones, recibirán de las autoridades protección adecuad) no sufran ni estén expuestos a persecuciones o sanciones administrativas, económicas o de otra índole a raíz de cualquier medida que hayan adoptado de conformidad con las obligaciones, reglas y normas éticas que se reconocen a su profesión.

 

18. Los abogados no serán identificados con sus clientes ni con las causas de sus clientes como consecuencia del desempeño de sus funciones.).

a.Los abogados no serán identificados con sus clientes ni con las causas de sus clientes como consecuencia del desempeño de sus funciones.).

La Recomendación N° R(2000)21 del Comité de Ministros sobre la libertad de ejercicio de la profesión de abogados se ha pronunciado en favor de los mismos principios (Principio I – Principios generales sobre la libertad de ejercicio de la profesión del abogado 1. Se deben tomar las medidas necesarias para respetar, proteger, y promover la libertad de ejercicio de la profesión de abogado sin discriminación y sin interferencias impropias de las autoridades o del público en general, en particular a la luz de las disposiciones relevantes del Convenio.).

En efecto, el Derecho de defensa no sólo se garantiza mediante la presencia de un abogado sino, también y especialmente, a través de su libre elección y la garantía que podrá ejercer su misión sin ser amenazado, perturbado, limitado o denunciado por haber desplegado la estrategia de defensa que considere más apropiada en el momento concreto.

La A.E.D. exige que cesen este tipo de ataques y se dirige a los Colegios de la Abogacía correspondientes para que insten a las autoridades españolas la adopción de las medidas oportunas para que estos abogados sean protegidos en el desempeño de su ejercicio profesional.

 

Colmar, 3 de setiembre de 2018.

Posted on

On the repression in Catalonia on the 1st of October 2017

The events that have taken place on the 1st of October in Catalonia are very concerning for a Democracy. Therefore, we severely condemn the actions taken by the Policía Nacional and the Guardia Civil, which have violated the fundamental rights of the people, like the right to health and physical integrity, the right to political participation, the freedom of assembly, the right to vote and the freedom of expression. The Spanish police forces have acted in a totally disproportionate and unjustified manner, in a context of passive and peaceful protest, without acts of provocation or violence being committed.

The first aim of the police action was to frighten the population in order to dissuade them from voting – without going into the legality of the vote. Moreover, some of the action on the ground of the Guardia Civil and the Policía Nacional has exceeded the order of the judicial authority. These police forces needed a justification to act violently, with hatred, against independence, a justification that this judicial decision provided them. This explains the gratuitous and cruel aggressions against citizens who were in the polling stations as well as the systematic destruction public furniture and school buildings.

Police action has violated the law by the widespread and indiscriminate violence against the population with the use of anti-riot materials such as rubber bullets or tear gas, which are strictly prohibited in situations where there is no serious danger. This was not the case, instead there were millions of people exercising fundamental rights in a peaceful manner. Besides the physical – more than 870 wounded – and psychological damage, their actions have prevented thousands of people from voting, through unprecedented repressive action at European level. Their actions did not even respect people in situations of vulnerability such as the elderly, they attacked the sexual integrity of women and caused extensive damage to community-owned equipment.

This widespread and disproportionate repressive action against all citizens of a territory without distinction is contrary to the rules of any democratic state.

The AED considers that the problem lies in the political weakness of the Spanish government to democratically approach a political demand and denounces the instrumental use of the police, of prosecutors and judges who should not be agents or arbitrators in a conflict of political nature.

Finally, the AED stresses the impressive silence of the EU institutions on this conflict.

2nd of October 2017

Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, Berlin, Rome, Madrid, Athens,

Download this press release in FRENCH or in ENGLISH

 

Posted on

On the Catalonian Referendum

The Bureau of the Association “AVOCATS EUROPEANS DEMOCRATES” (AED) -created 30 years ago and which has brought together associations and unions of European lawyers committed to the defense of the rights of people- has met in Berlin and notes with concern some of the reactions of the Spanish administrative and judicial authorities against the decision of the political authorities and the citizens of Catalonia to celebrate on the 1st of October a referendum on self-determination approved by a law of the Catalonian Parliament and organized by its government. The reaction of the Spanish government has been to challenge its validity, while the Spanish Constitutional Court suspended the law.

Regardless of the debate on the legal validity and the political value that may result from such a referendum, provisionally suspended by a court of constitutional guarantees, and regardless of the debate if the suspension of the referendum automatically means to prevent violently its effective celebration, in these days we are witnessing restrictions on the fundamental rights of the citizenship, often without judicial intervention, such as the freedom of expression, the freedom of information, the right of assembly, the secret and integrity of communications and the right to the natural judge predetermined by the law, going far beyond measures characteristic of a state of emergency.

Thus, the public mail service, without judicial authorization, has withheld correspondence for its content; public initiatives to discuss the referendum have been suspended; citizens have been identified and detained for the only reason of publicly defending their political ideas; print material has been seized, together with the red carnations, which were distributed to emphasize the peaceful character of the Catalonian proposal for political change. More than 700 Catalan mayors have been summoned by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who has opened criminal proceedings against Catalonian Parliamentarians, as well as all the Catalan Government in full. Printing presses haven been registered without previous judicial order and the media has issued coercive police warnings.

These are signs of the democratic weakness of the Spanish State and are part of a repressive strategy that denies politics as an instrument of change. The AED considers this corresponds to an undemocratic violation of fundamental rights and demands the Spanish State to reinstate these political and civil rights immediately.