Griñán demands that the Seville Court extend the term to enter prison to three months

Former Andalusian president José Antonio Griñán has asked the Seville Court to extend to three months the 10-day term given to enter prison after the final ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of fraudulent EREs.

In his appeal, the last chance to avoid jail, Griñán demands that the three magistrates in charge of executing the sentence delay it for three months in order to give the Government time to decide on the pardon requested by his family. .

Appeals on the execution of sentences usually have very little chance of success, according to legal sources.

In parallel, the former Andalusian president adds that this extension of the term would also give the Supreme Court time to resolve the nullity incident raised before the ruling of the political piece of the ERE.

"We propose three months and send official letters to the National Government and to the 1st Section of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, asking them to remove the obstacles that prevent the most expeditious processing of individual files as they affect the ordinary course of the execution of a sentence ”, reads the appeal filed.

Before next Monday, it is foreseeable that as many appeals will be presented before the Hearing of the seven former senior officials convicted of embezzlement, to try to delay their imprisonment.

The former Andalusian president alleges that by requesting this delay he seeks not to advance compliance with the sentence to the possible pardon, if it were granted, something that would make him serve months in prison despite the possible pardon of the Government or review of the sentence by the high court.

“It is undeniable that if the partial pardon were granted or the nullity question was upheld (…) the imprisonment that is ordered would be unsuccessful, improper or inadmissible, that is, unnecessary.

What we want is an execution of the sentence, which in its time, adjusts to criteria of prudence and justice.

Griñán demands that the court agree to grant him "a reasonable time, of course, greater than 10 days", so that the Supreme Court, the Government, and finally the Constitutional Court, before which he has filed an appeal, meet his requirements .

The former president reminds the Court that his family has requested pardon for "exceptional" humanitarian and legal reasons.

On this last point, Griñán's defense highlights the particular vote issued in the Supreme Court ruling by two magistrates who rejected the embezzlement that the other three judges blamed on him.

“How could the injured right to freedom of movement, the right to honor, the intense suffering associated with the injury to the two affected fundamental rights be restored?

Is it necessary to prove this irreparable damage that would inexorably occur if the appealed resolution were to gain finality? ”, He questions.

Finally, Griñán reflects in his writing on a consequence that he calls "scandalous": "In a procedure that has taken more than a decade, for not waiting just a few months, a 76-year-old septuagenarian would have been forced to enter prison , which would ultimately be improper.

The courts should attend to the social alarm of good and prudent citizens.

The other, populist, is a social alarm, provoked and always interested, that is born from feeding the worst feelings of resentment and partisan phobias.

The Court will resolve this and other resources once it is transferred to the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office and it pronounces itself.