Spain – Avocats Européens Démocrates

07/12/2022

Massive Espionage on seven Spanish Lawyers using the Pegasus programme

TO THE OBSERVATOIRE INTERNATIONAL DES AVOCATS EN DANGER (OIAD)

INFORMATION ON MASSIVE ESPIONAGE PERPETRATED ON SEVEN SPANISH LAWYERS USING THE PEGASUS PROGRAM

The indiscriminate ‘hacking’ using the PEGASUS spy program that was carried out on pro-independence politicians, has also affected seven lawyers: Gonzalo Boye Tusset, Josep Costa, Jaume Alonso Cuevillas, Andreu Van den Eyden, Joaquim Jubert, Josep Rius and Jordi Domingo, the first one from the Madrid Bar Assotiation (ICAM) and the remaining six from the Bacelona Bar Assotiation (ICAB). This is confirmed ny the information received through the media, and the judicial investigations that are being carried out in a Barcelona court.

The right to defence, the duty of confidentiality between lawyer and client and, ultimately, professional secrecy, are fundamental pillars not only of our profession, but also of the right to effective judicial protection as a guarantee of the rule of law.

The right to defence of our clients and the right to a trial with all the guarantees depend on the duty of secrecy, confidentiality and, ultimately, professional secrecy. Not in vain has it been defined as a right (of the client) and a duty (of the lawyer), and for this reason it is part of our commitment as lawyers to preserve it and guarantee its integrity against any external interference.

The Spanish Supreme Court has already indicated in its ruling 78/2012, of February 9, 2012 (Garzón case), the following:

“ Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution, provides together with other rights that, although different and independent from each other, constituting a battery of

guarantees aimed at ensuring the real effectiveness of one of them: the right to a trial with guarantees, to a fair trial , in terms of the ECHR [European Convention on Human Rights]; ultimately, to a fair trial . So that the legitimate claim of the State regarding the prosecution and punishment of criminal behavior should only be satisfied within the limits imposed on the exercise of power by the rights that correspond to citizens in a rule of law. Nobody seriously disputes in this framework that the search for the truth, even supposing that it is reached, does not justify the use of any means. Justice obtained at any price ends up not being Justice.

The confidentiality of the relationship between the accused and his defence lawyer, which naturally must be governed by trust, is an essential element (ECHR Castravet v. Moldova, March 13, 2007, p. 49; and ECHR Foxley v. United Kingdom , of June 20, 2000, page 43) In the ECHR of October 5, 2006, case Viola against Italy (61), it was stated that “…the right, for the accused, to communicate with his lawyer without being heard by third parties is among the elementary requirements of the fair trial in a democratic society and derives from article 6.3 c) of the Convention. If a lawyer could not meet with his client without such surveillance and receive confidential instructions from him, his assistance would lose much of its usefulness (Judgment S. against Switzerland of November 2, 1991, series A no. 220, pg. 16, app. 48)”.

The events that we are hearing about through the media are especially serious, and require clear explanations about the perpetrators of these acts of espionage, by whom or by whom they were authorized, and whether there has been any type of judicial authorization , or whether this espionage has occurred without any type of control and in a massive and indiscriminate manner.

In this context, the Barcelona Bar Association (ICAB) and the Council of Catalan Bars (CICAC) have issued a joint statement at the end of which they denounced the use of Pegasus against lawyers and requested explanations from the Spanish Government on what could be a serious violation of fundamental rights, the rights of defence and professional secrecy, compromising the rule of law and the peaceful coexistence of society in Spain.

On the other hand, the Madrid Bar Association (ICAM) has not yet reacted and the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (CGAE) only reacted on April 29, 2022, following the request addressed to it to this effect by the Free Lawyers Association (Asociación Libre de Abogadas y Abogados – ALA), in consideration of the seriousness of these acts of espionage against the aforementioned lawyers.

For this reason, and because these are serious facts that directly attack our profession, the right of defence as a fundamental aspect in the functioning of justice and the effective development of the right to a trial with all the

guarantees, we request the Observatoire International des Avocats en Danger (OIAD) to demand all the explanations from the Spanish Government and uncover all the responsibilities regarding these events, acting in defence of this group of lawyers, and to issue a press release to denounce this attack on the rights of the defence, on professional secrecy, as well as on private life; and also afford your protection to these lawyers against future interference in the exercise of their professional activity. You must give your unequivocal support for the Catalan and Madrid lawyers who were victims of the espionage perpetrated by means of the Pegasus software by the Spanish authorities.

Naples, 30th of June 2022

10/03/202010/05/2020

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 (10^th 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

3^rd of October 2020

02/21/202002/24/2020

the protection of European borders prevails over the right to asylum

The European Court of Human Right (ECHR) just took a decision in favour of the Spanish authorities, by endorsing the practice known as “push-back” of people trying to reach the Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla. Although another body of the Court had already condemned Spain in 2017 for this illegal practice[1], its Grand Chamber decided this time that Spain had not violated the rights of the exiles who had already crossed its border by sending them back to Morocco quickly and widely. With this highly serious decision, the ECHR legitimizes the generalization of the principle of non-refoulement. Furthermore, it endorses the impossibility of applying for asylum in case of illegal border crossing and welcomes the good collaboration with Morocco in the repression of exiles.

Migrants face refoulement practices all along their way at the EU’s external borders which are increasingly extending to the South, and to the East. They also face it when they try to cross the Sahara[2], the Balkan countries[3] or when they attempt to flee the Libyan hell[4]. This reality (which can lead to death in the most dramatic cases) also affects the European territory, as illustrated by the recurrent deportations of migrants at the French borders with Italy and Spain[5]. The refoulement practices are multiplying and have become an increasingly standardised form of management of the illegalised mobility that it’s necessary to stop by any means.

For at least two decades they have suffered from the violence of the Spanish border guards while trying to enter in the enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla. The Spanish militaries are not to be outdone: numerous NGOs reports show that Morocco regularly conducts violent repressions and roundups to keep exiles away from the border[6].

Despite this old and well-documented reality, the ECHR in its judgement of 13 February concludes that Spain has not committed any violation, finding “(…) that the applicants [had] placed themselves in an unlawful situation” by attempting to cross the Melilla border at an unauthorised location. It adds that “They thus chose not to use the legal procedures which existed in order to enter Spanish territory lawfully (…)”. Misleading argument considering only exiles who entered through an accredited border post could be protected from refoulement or that they could apply for asylum at the consulate without hindrance. However, numerous human rights organisations – whose reports were deliberately disregarded by the Court – have established that black people are especially tracked by the Moroccan security forces who prevent them from reaching the border posts of the enclaves. Access to the asylum office in Ceuta and Melilla (established in 2015) is thus impossible for them. They have no other choice but to climb over fences and their sharp blades, or set sail, risking their lives[7].

The ECHR, by reversing Spain’s conviction, gives a strong signal to the European States for the generalization of these violent practices of refoulement and to the legitimation of the externalisation of asylum. Indeed, by figuring that a Member State can restrict the right to seek protection on its territory in some places or some circumstances, the Court endorses practices contrary to international law and that the EU has been trying to promote for a long time: preventing the arrival of those who are looking for protection, either by erecting physical or legal barriers, or by subcontracting its obligations to countries notoriously hostile to migrants.

The signatory associations strongly condemn the Court decision. We refuse to allow the principle of non-refoulement, a cornerstone of the right to asylum, to be questioned in the name of the externalisation policy and of the borders protection of the EU and its Member States. We support migrants in the exercise of their freedom of movement, and we fight against the violence and racism that they suffer along their illegalized trajectories.

Signataries :

Association Européenne pour la défense des Droits de l’Homme – AEDH (Europe)
European Democrates Lawyers (Europe)
Borderline Europe (Allemagne)
Euromed Rights (réseau Euro-Mediterranéen)
Group of lawyers for the Rights of Migrants and Refugees (Grèce)
Lawyers for Freedom – OHD (Turquie)
Migreurop (réseau Euro-Africain)
Progressive Lawyers association – CHD (Turquie)
Republican Lawyers Association – RAV (Allemagne)

[1] ECHR, October 3, 2017, N.D. et N.T. c. Spain, req. n° 8675/15 et 8697/15

[2] Amnesty International report, « Forced to leave – stories of injustice against migrants in Algeria », 2017 ; Alarmphone Sahara, « Octobre 2019 à Janvier 2020: Continuation des convois d’expulsions de l’Algérie au Niger », January 2020

[3] Le Monde « La Bosnie, cul-de-sac pour les migrants », December 30,2019 ; See also the website of « Welcome» which informs on violence in the Balkan countries. https://welcome.cms.hr/index.php/en/

[4] Brief n°7 « Libya: where thugs are funded by Europe to mistreat migrants », May 2018 ; Forensic Oceanography, “Mare Clausum”, May 2018

[5] ANAFE, Persona non grata –Conséquences des politiques sécuritaires et migratoires à la frontières franco-italienne, Observation report 2017-2018

[6] See for instance: Migreurop, « War on migrants – The black book of Ceuta and Melilla » 2006, Human Rights Watch « Abused and Expelled Ill-Treatment of Sub-Saharan African Migrants in Morocco », 2014 ; Caminando Fronteras « Tras la frontera », 2017 ; GADEM « Coûts et blessures – Rapport sur les opérations des forces de l’ordre menées dans le nord du Maroc entre juillet et septembre 2018 », 2019

[7] See for instance : collective report « Ceuta et Melilla : centres de tri à ciel ouvert aux portes de l’Afrique ? », December 2015 ; Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights – Applications No. 8675/15 and No. 8697/15N.D. v. Spain and N.T. v. Spain: https://rm.coe.int/third-party-intervention-n-d-and-n-t-v-spain-by-nils-muiznieks-council/1680796bfc ; Third party intervention by Aire Centre, Amnesty International, ECRE and the International Commission of Jurists: https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR4191102018ENGLISH.PDF

02/16/202009/16/2020

CRIMINALIZATION OF JURISTS FOR THEIR PUBLIC DENUNCIATION OF TORTURE AND MISTREATMENT

The AED-EDL has been informed of the trial against Lorena Ruiz-Huerta, which has taken place on the 10th of February 2020. Lorena Ruiz-Huerta is accused of slander for statements she made on television in 2014, when she was a practicing lawyer and member of ALA, in which she stated that during her professional work as a legal aid lawyer she was aware of the usual praxis of wrongful acts against the rights of detainees by police corps. The lawyer was denounced and accused of the crime of slander by the Unified Police Union, the Union of the Guardia Civil and the Federal Union of Police, as well as by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Further, the AED-EDL has also learnt about the complaint of three prison-agents’ trade-unions in Catalonia against Iñaki Rivera, Director of the Observatory of the Criminal System and Human Rights (OSPDH), and the SIRECOVI project of the University of Barcelona, professor of law and researcher, for having stated in a television program that in the prisons of Catalonia there was torture, ill-treatment and abuse. This jurist who defends human rights has deserved the support of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) in a joint statement on the 21^st of December 2018. In their statement, they warned that the misuse of criminal law against statements and messages protected by freedom of expression and information had an inhibiting effect. On the 16^th of September 2019 the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) issued a new urgent appeal.

The AED-EDL supports both professionals and denounces the criminalization of lawyers and jurists in the exercise of their profession and in their action to denounce the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the practice of torture and ill-treatment by public officials. The critical disclosure of these practices is part of the commitment of the legal profession to the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms and is protected by the freedom of expression and information, thus helping to inform the public and the public debate on the functioning of State institutions, according to point 23 of the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (8th UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders – Havana, 27 August to 7 September 1990) and as proclaimed, among others, by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Morice v. France.

Barcelona, on the 15^th of February 2020

—

LA CRIMINALIZACION DE LOS JURISTAS POR SU LABOR DE DENUNCIA DE LAS TORTURAS Y MALOS TRATOS

La AED ha tenido conocimiento que el día 10/2/2020 tuvo lugar el juicio por delito de calumnias contra Lorena Ruiz- Huerta por unas declaraciones en televisión en el 2014, fecha en que era abogada en ejercicio y miembro de ALA, en las que manifestó que en el ejercicio de su profesión como letrada del Turno de Oficio había tenido conocimiento de la práctica habitual de actuaciones lesivas contra los derechos de las personas detenidas por parte de los cuerpos policiales. La abogada fue denunciada y acusada por el delito de calumnias, por parte del Sindicato Unificado de Policía, la Unión de Guardias Civiles y la Unión Federal de Policía, así como de la Fiscalía.

Por otro lado, la AED también ha tenido conocimiento de la denuncia de tres sindicatos de funcionarios de prisiones de Catalunya contra Iñaki Rivera, Director del Observatori del Sistema Penal i dels Drets Humans (OSPDH), y del proyecto SIRECOVI de la Universidad de Barcelona, profesor de Derecho e investigador, por haber manifestado en un programa televisivo que en las prisiones de Cataluña existía la práctica de la tortura, los malos tratos y las vejaciones. La criminalización de este jurista defensor de los derechos humanos, mereció el apoyo de la Federación Internacional de Derechos Humanos (FIDH) y de la Organización Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT) en un pronunciamiento conjunto de 21/12/2018. En él, alertaron del efecto inhibitorio del uso indebido del derecho penal contra las declaraciones y los mensajes protegidos por la libertad de expresión e información. El 16/9/2019 la Organización Mundial de la Tortura (OMCT) realizó un nuevo llamado urgente.

La AED muestra su apoyo a ambos profesionales y denuncia la criminalización de los abogados y de los juristas en el ejercicio de su profesión y de su acción de denuncia sobre la vulneración de derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales, incluida la práctica de la tortura y de los malos tratos por parte de funcionarios públicos. La divulgación crítica de estas prácticas forma parte del compromiso de la abogacía con la promoción de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales y está amparada por la libertad de expresión y de información, colaborando a informar la ciudadanía y al debate público sobre el funcionamiento de las instituciones del Estado, según el punto 23 de los Principios Básicos sobre la Función de los Abogados (VIII Congreso de NNUU sobre Prevención del Delito y Tratamiento del Delincuente –La Habana, 27 de agosto a 7 de septiembre de 1990-) y como proclama, entre otras, la STEDH de la Gran Cámara en el caso Morice contra Francia.

Barcelona a 15 de febrero de 2020

11/23/201909/16/2020

Statement on the Judgement of the Spanish Supreme Court on the Catalan Referendum Case

in English:

Berlin, on the 23^rd of November 2019

The AED was part of the dozens of international organizations monitoring the Trial on the Catalan Referendum Case in Madrid. In a statement this February we warned of the lack of procedural guarantees and the danger of violating human rights if there were a conviction.

On Monday, the 14^th of October, the Spanish Supreme Court issued an unprecedented ruling in Europe, condemning the Catalan political and social leaders to a total of 100 years in prison. In this sentence, peaceful demonstrations or peaceful resistance represented the crime of sedition (“public uprising and tumultuary“). This sentence clearly restricts the exercise of freedom of expression, the right to peaceful assembly, as well as public political participation.

The Court dropped the State Prosecutor’s charges of rebellion, but issued severe sentences for the crimes of sedition, embezzlement of public funds, and disobedience, in the context of the Referendum on the Independence of Catalonia, on the 1^st of October 2017.

The AED recalls that the referendum was a non-violent act of civil disobedience, organized peacefully to allow the voices of many Catalans to be heard. The only violence on the 1st October was perpetrated by the Spanish Police, in actions of disproportionate violence.

AED considers:

– These have been political proceedings, putting people on trial for their political ideas.

– The prison sentences imposed represent a historical error, which, far from solving the problem, worsens it.

– The powers of the Spanish Kingdom have done nothing to resolve this situation, which should have been solved politically through dialogue, and not through the involvement of the judicial power and therefore with the intervention of the State Prosecutor’s Office, directly appointed by the Spanish Government.

– Far from providing any solution, the verdict against the political prisoners shifts the conflict to the European arena and the international courts of Justice, which will not solve the problem either. If the international community, particularly the European Union, does not play an active role in helping resolving the conflict, an international call for dialogue and a peaceful and democratic solution is needed.

AED condemns the violation of Human Rights (civil and political rights listed and recognized by Treaties and Conventions dully signed by the Kingdom of Spain), the violation of criminal and procedural principles, as well as the criminal law principles of fragmentation, proportionality and last resort, by the criminal proceedings and its sentence of last 14^th of October 2019.

The grave violation of the abovementioned rights and principles in this sentence and its logic, renders it impossible to analyze from a strictly legal point of view. Any earnest attempt at interpreting this sentence based on technical and legal concepts, such as sedition, uprising, violence or fundamental right becomes partially unsuccessful. The reason is because it is an ideological resolution aimed at replacing the political solution that is needed in the conflict in Catalonia.

AED asks the executive powers of both the Spanish and Catalan governments to seek through dialogue and compromise to end the criminal response to the underlying political problem, to put an end to the repression by police, to free the prisoners and bid the safe return of the exiles and, instead, finally seek to start a negotiation to find a political solution to the conflict based on dialogue and respect.

in French:

Motion sur l’arrêt de la Cour suprême espagnole sur l’affaire du référendum catalan

Berlin, le 23 novembre 2019

L’AED a participé avec dizaines d’organisations internationales dans l’observation du procès sur l’affaire du référendum catalan. Dans une déclaration faite en février dernier nous avons mis en garde contre l’absence de garanties procédurales et le risque de bafouer les droits de l’homme des accusés en cas de condamnation.

Lundi 14 octobre, la Cour suprême espagnole a rendu un arrêt sans précédent en Europe, condamnant les dirigeants politiques et sociaux catalans à 100 ans de prison au total. Dans cette arrêt, les manifestations pacifiques ou la résistance pacifique représentaient le crime de sédition (“soulèvement public et tumulte”). Cette phrase restreint clairement l’exercice de la liberté d’expression, le droit de réunion pacifique, ainsi que la participation politique publique.

La Cour a abandonné les accusations de rébellion portées par le Procureur de la République, mais a prononcé des peines sévères pour les crimes de sédition, de détournement de fonds publics et de désobéissance dans le cadre du référendum sur l’indépendance de la Catalogne, le 1er octobre 2017.

L’AED rappelle que le référendum était un acte non violent de désobéissance civile, organisé pacifiquement pour permettre à de nombreux Catalans de faire entendre leur voix. La seule violence du 1er octobre a été perpétrée par la police espagnole, dans des actes de violence disproportionnée.

L’AED observe que

Il s’agit de procédures politiques, de poursuites judiciaires contre des personnes pour leurs idées politiques.
Les peines d’emprisonnement imposées représentent une erreur historique qui, loin de résoudre le problème, l’aggrave.
Les pouvoirs du Royaume d’Espagne n’ont rien fait pour résoudre cette situation, qui aurait dû être résolue politiquement par le dialogue, et non par la participation du pouvoir judiciaire et donc par l’intervention du Procureur, directement nommé par le gouvernement espagnol.
Loin d’apporter une solution, le verdict contre les prisonniers politiques déplace le conflit vers l’arène européenne et les tribunaux internationaux de justice, ce qui ne résoudra pas non plus le problème. Si la communauté internationale, en particulier l’Union européenne, ne joue pas un rôle actif dans la résolution du conflit, un appel international au dialogue et à une solution pacifique et démocratique est nécessaire.

L’AED condamne la violation des Droits de l’Homme (droits civils et politiques énumérés et reconnus par les Traités et Conventions dûment signés par le Royaume d’Espagne), la violation des principes pénaux et procéduraux, ainsi que les principes de fragmentation, de proportionnalité et de dernier recours du droit pénal, par cette procédure pénale et l’arrêt du 14 octobre 2019.

La violation grave des droits et principes susmentionnés dans cette phrase et sa logique rendent impossible une analyse d’un point de vue strictement juridique. Toute tentative sérieuse d’interprétation de cette phrase fondée sur des concepts techniques et juridiques, tels que la sédition, le soulèvement, la violence ou les droits fondamentaux, échoue partiellement. La raison en est qu’il s’agit d’une résolution idéologique visant à remplacer la solution politique nécessaire dans le conflit en Catalogne.

L’AED demande aux pouvoirs exécutifs des gouvernements espagnol et catalan de chercher, par le dialogue et le compromis, à mettre fin à la réponse criminelle au problème politique sous-jacent, à mettre fin à la répression policière, à libérer les prisonniers et à demander le retour des exilés en toute sécurité et, enfin, à entamer une négociation pour trouver une solution politique au conflit basée sur le dialogue et le respect.

01/18/201905/30/2019

¿QUÉ ESTÁ HACIENDO EL ESTADO ESPAÑOL CON EL BARCO DE OPEN ARMS?

Nadie en Europa puede decir que desconoce la situación de vulnerabilidad extrema en que se encuentran las personas migrantes que se trasladan desde países de Oriente próximo y África hasta Europa, debido a las situaciones de guerra y/o crisis humanitaria que sufren. El drama de los/as refugiados/as, que ha convertido el mar Mediterráneo en un cementerio, ha supuesto una crisis en la concepción de Europa como un espacio común fundado sobre valores de dignidad humana, igualdad y solidaridad, y nos ha obligado a todos a cuestionar el papel de Europa en el mundo.Ni las instituciones europeas ni los Estados Miembros han estado a la altura, e incluso algún estado está manteniendo posturas inadmisibles desde la perspectiva de los Derechos Humanos, como pasa con el VicePresidente Salvini en Italia. Efectivamente, han surgido iniciativas que pretenden convertir, fraudulentamente, la crisis humanitaria que sufrimos en un problema de orden público. Evitar la muerte de cientos de personas no es una mera cuestión de orden público ni puede serlo. Construir muros y sellar las fronteras, separando pueblos y despojando a las personas migrantes de su dignidad, no es una respuesta admisible desde la perspectiva de Derechos Humanos. Además, estas políticas exponen al/la migrante a los peligros de elegir cada vez rutas más inseguras, favorecen la aparición de las mafias y su consecuencia más cruda es el naufragio de miles de personas en nuestro mar mediterráneo.

Es esa decepcionante actitud de las instituciones europeas y de los estados miembros de la Unión Europea la que ha provocado que organizaciones como Open Arms intervenga con acciones esenciales de vigilancia y salvamento, salvando miles de vidas en el mar. Estas organizaciones se na puesto, por ello, en el punto de mira de la opinión pública, y también dentro de los objetivos represivos de algunos Estados, que han intentado, también fraudulentamente, criminalizar su actuación. Recientemente el barco de Open Arms llegó a España con 310 personas rescatadas, pues los países más cercanos al lugar de rescate (Italia, Malta) incumplieron sus obligaciones internacionales y negaron el acceso a sus puertos a Open Arms.

El día 8 de enero de 2019 el barco de Open Arms debió haber salido del puerto de Barcelona rumbo a la zona SAR de Libia para continuar con su labor esencial de salvar vidas. Sin embargo Capitanía Marítima, dependiente del Ministerio de Fomento, ha bloqueado el buque en el puerto de Barcelona alegando que pese a no ser imputable al propio barco, con su último regreso a España se incumplieron diversos preceptos de la normativa marítima. Como medida preventiva y para evitar futuros incumplimientos, deniega la salida hasta que no se garantice que existe un acuerdo para el desembarco de los auxiliados con las autoridades responsables de las zonas SAR concernidas, algo que difícilmente ocurrirá, pues ni Italia, ni Libia, ni Malta facilitan estos acuerdos.

Tenemos que volver a poner de manifiesto, en voz alta y clara, que es el incumplimiento habitual del resto de países de su deber de auxilio lo que está en el origen del problema, que no es otro que las muertes en el mar. No puede atribuirse ningún incumplimiento normativo a quien precisamente presta ese auxilio, porque el derecho a la vida ha de priorizarse siempre respecto de cualquier normativa marítima. Con el bloqueo del buque no está en juego únicamente su derecho a navegar sino que se pone en riesgo la vida de las personas migrantes a quienes rescata Open Arms ante la pasividad de quienes están obligados a actuar en virtud del derecho internacional humanitario.

Por ello reclamamos que no se obstaculice la labor humanitaria del buque Open Arms anclado en el puerto de Barcelona y exigimos que los incumplimientos de terceros Estados sean denunciados por el Gobierno de España al órgano competente para su sanción, y que, entretanto, colabore activamente con el respeto de los derechos humanos y contribuya a solucionar la crisis humanitaria en que estamos inmersos, en vez de impedir la labor de quienes salvan vidas en el mar.

Barcelona, 18 de enero de 2019

10/04/201701/22/2018

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.

2^nd of October 2017

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

Download this press release in FRENCH or in ENGLISH

09/21/201701/22/2018

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.

03/21/201603/21/2016