The Constitutional will study the resources of Alberto Rodríguez against the withdrawal of his seat

The Constitutional has admitted for processing the two amparo appeals presented by Alberto Rodríguez against the decisions that involved the withdrawal of his seat as a deputy of Podemos.

The court appreciates special constitutional importance for the case, whose admission implies that the door is opened to the possibility of Rodríguez recovering his parliamentary act, if the procedure that is now being initiated shows that his fundamental rights were violated by removing him from Congress. especially that of political participation.

The first appeal admitted for processing is the one raised against the resolutions of the Supreme Criminal Chamber, after considering Rodríguez guilty of a lack of injuries and a crime of attack against an agent of the authority, sentencing him to 1 month and 15 days in prison. , which they replaced with a fine.

In the same resolutions, the accessory penalty of special disqualification for the right to passive suffrage was imposed during the time of the main sentence.

The Supreme Court understood that the accessory penalty is applied despite the substitution of the custodial sentence.

And that is what is appealed for.

The appellant alleges violation of his rights because the accessory penalty of special disqualification for the right to passive suffrage was imposed despite the substitution of imprisonment for a fine.

Secondly, the Constitutional Court has admitted a parliamentary amparo appeal, which was filed against the agreement of the president of Congress, Meritxell Batet, who last October informed the appellant that his replacement as deputy had been arranged, in execution of the decisions of the Supreme.

The presidency of Congress thus attended to the interpretation of the Criminal Chamber on the applicability of the accessory penalty, that relating to the disqualification of the deputy.

What the Constitutional Court must now decide is whether or not Rodríguez's right to remain in public office has been violated by having agreed to replace him as a deputy of Congress by applying a supervening incompatibility, that is, for having been convicted by a sentence firm to a custodial sentence, when this has been replaced by a fine.

Alberto Rodríguez understands that the parliamentary resolution was adopted by someone who lacked the competence to do so, alleging that it would correspond to the Plenary Session of the Chamber, following a proposal from the Commission of the Statute of the Deputy.

Rodríguez alleges, on the other hand, that the consequence of the loss of the condition of deputy implies a double punishability and is a disproportionate consequence derived from the criminal sanction.

The Constitutional Court has considered that in both appeals there is special constitutional importance because they pose a problem or affect a facet of a fundamental right on which there is no doctrine of this Court and because the matter raised transcends the specific case, because it could have political consequences. generals.

However, the court has refused to suspend the decision of the president of Congress, as a precautionary measure.

In parallel, the court has opened a separate piece of provisional measures to listen to all the parties interested in the procedure and study the request for suspension.