Independence on trial: international observers remind Prosecutor that "demonstrating, shouting and singing" don’t constitute sedition

BarcelonaOn the twenty-second day of the trial, the international observers believe that the Prosecutor's Office is deliberately equating the exercise of fundamental rights with the crime of sedition. A statement released by International Trial Watch (ITW) this Tuesday referring to the sixth week of the trial cites the example of the testimonies given by Guardia Civil officers who were responsible for the arrests on 20 September and the 1 October operation. According to ITW, "The public prosecutor questions the witnesses in such a way as to suggest that gathering to sing and shout, or showing disapproval of the police’s actions are tantamount to evidence of sedition".

The international observers feel that the prosecution's attitude —which is tolerated by presiding judge Manuel Marchena— "may have repercussions beyond the trial", since it may "discourage" demonstrations in what it refers to as a "chilling effect" (discouraging others from exercising their fundamental rights as a response to the threat of punishment or a penalty).

The ITW’s report on the sixth week of the trial was signed by Ernesto Moreau, Vice President of the American Association of Jurists, and Alejandro Forero, Professor in the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology at the University of Barcelona. According to the report, the only positive aspect of Manuel Marchena’s performance is that he has continued to prevent the prosecutors from asking leading questions.

Meanwhile, there are eight points which ITW considers worthy of further investigation. Besides the prosecutor's office attempt to criminalize the right to protest, the international observers criticize Marchena for refusing to allow video footage relating to 20 September and 1 October in order to contradict the version of events given by of certain witnesses. They also criticise Marchena for allowing certain questions to stray beyond the evidence included in the pre-trial documents, thus hampering the defence’s preparations for cross-examining the witnesses. According to ITW, the fact that the judge does not allow any line of questioning which deviates from areas which were proposed by the party who called the witness, is also potentially detrimental to the defendants.

The lengthy sessions, the lack of information regarding the complete timetable for the trial and the fact that the events in question are simultaneously being investigated by three courts (the Supreme Court, the National Court and Barcelona’s Court of Instruction number 13) are some of the other issues which the observers regard as illogical.