Publication: Friday December 18 2020 09:32
The Supreme Court dismisses all complaints against the government for its handling of COVID-19. Thus, Chamber II of the Supreme Court decided the inadmissibility of the treatment of the 20 complaints and 30 complaints filed in recent months by various unions, associations, relatives of the victims and Vox against the executive. The Supreme Court considers that responsibility for punishable acts attributed to members of the executive is not duly justified.
However, he agrees to deduce testimonies from these complaints and complaints and forward them to the High Court of the Courts of Madrid so that the corresponding criminal cases can be initiated or added to those already in progress or have been dealt with.
In particular, as the order of the Supreme Court explains, these inquiries by the ordinary courts should concern deaths in nursing homes, the possible omission of the safety measures that have been provided to health professionals or to police officers and possible hijackings. public funds for the rental of failed or fraudulent equipment to fight the pandemic.
The legal-criminal qualification of an act cannot depend on the collective indignation provoked by the tragedy “
The magistrates recall that when the proceedings initiated by these courts show the existence of signs of responsibility against a graduate, it will be time for the examining magistrate, if necessary, to present a reasoned statement to them. subject to the Supreme Court.
The ordinance analyzes in detail each of the crimes attributed in the complaints and reports, such as homicide and reckless injury; crime against workers’ rights; prevarication and embezzlement of public funds. Among the reported events, it was emphasized that the concentrations of 8-M had been authorized a few days before the declaration of the alarm state and that no adequate protective equipment had been provided to health professionals or to state security forces.
But the Court underlines in the order that “it is always obvious to affirm that the juridico-penal classification of a fact cannot depend on the collective indignation in front of the tragedy in which we are still plunged, nor on a legitimate disagreement with government decisions that may be considered wrong. There are other scenarios in which the claim of this type of responsibility must be asserted. “