The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The Supreme Court confirms the conviction of the former mayor of Alcarràs for favoring the celebration of the 1-O referendum

2024-02-27T17:33:55.834Z

Highlights: The Supreme Court confirms the conviction of the former mayor of Alcarràs for favoring the celebration of the 1-O referendum. The high court rejects Miquel Serra's appeal and ratifies the sentence of three months of disqualification and a fine of 450 euros. Serra is another of the independence leaders who could benefit from the amnesty for those accused of the process negotiated by the PSOE, ERC and Junts. However, the amnesty would imply other effects, such as the erasure of their criminal records.


The high court rejects Miquel Serra's appeal and ratifies the sentence of three months of disqualification and a fine of 450 euros


The Supreme Court has confirmed the sentence of three months of disqualification and a fine of 450 euros to the former mayor of Alcarràs (Lleida, 8,644 inhabitants), Miquel Serra (ERC) for a crime of disobedience for favoring the celebration of the 1-O referendum.

The Criminal Court has rejected Serra's appeal against the ruling of the Provincial Court of Lleida that confirmed the sentence handed down by a Criminal Court.

The Supreme Court rejects the appeal, without analyzing the merits, considering that the writing recorded by the former mayor does not meet the requirements required by law in cassation appeals (those presented before the high court).

Serra is another of the independence leaders who could benefit from the amnesty for those accused of the

process

negotiated by the PSOE, ERC and Junts, although since it is a disqualification sentence of only three months, it is foreseeable that, if the grace measure is approved, the former mayor of Lleida has already served his sentence.

However, the amnesty would imply other effects, such as the erasure of their criminal records.

The sentence that condemned Serra considered it proven that, “with the firm intention of holding the referendum in his municipality, and in contravention of the judicial mandate,” the then mayor allowed the use of the El Casino premises as a voting center for the referendum on December 1. October 2017, which had been declared illegal by the Constitutional Court.

Serra was one of the authorities who was personally warned by the Constitutional Court of his “duty to prevent or paralyze any activity” that contravened the order to suspend the referendum issued by the court of guarantees, for which the judges consider that he acted “with full knowledge".

The ruling explains that the then mayor went to El Casino on October 1 “with the firm intention of holding the referendum in his municipality, and in contravention of the court order, he allowed the use of the premises” and “persistently and contumaciously, together with those present, resisted the intervention of the members of the Security Forces and Corps, to prevent them from accessing the premises and effectively complying with the judicial order.”

During the trial, Serra, who refused to answer the Prosecutor's questions, said that he did not participate in the organization of the referendum and that Lo Casino is a public place where they were carrying out activities throughout the weekend.

The former mayor defended that his responsibility was to “watch over the people of the municipality and maintain public order” and that he stood in front of the neighborhood barrier was to avoid “any violent act.”

Serra was already sentenced to another sentence of one year of disqualification and six months of fine for a crime of disobedience for not taking down pro-independence flags during the April 2019 general elections.



Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I am already a subscriber

_

Source: elparis

All news articles on 2024-02-27

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.