The Madrid provincial prosecutor’s office has suspended the investigation into military gossip in which it was a question of giving a coup or “shooting 26 million sons of bitches” while failing to assess a hate crime.
In this sense, the entity considers that the participants expressed themselves “in the confidence of being among friends”. The representative of the prosecution affirms that the messages which appear in a “private” chat, formed by members of the XIX class of the General Air Academy, expose the opinions of the other participants “freely”, and without any will. to make them known outside this scope.
Likewise, the Ministry of Defense itself informed the prosecutor’s office that the members of the group had retired many years ago, “over 40 years ago”, so that none of them between them is active.
These soldiers sent a letter to the king “showing or revealing a Francoist and far-right position”. In it, a criticism was leveled at the government, centered on the harassment that the judiciary is exercised and the threat that this poses to the separation of powers.
Inappropriate words but not criminal
The prosecution explained that “ the terms used may be considered inappropriate, excessive and unfortunate, but they were not born with the intention of advertising, so their intentionality cannot be equated with material acts of the outside world, but rather to a form to express their dissatisfaction with the current political situation. “
In addition, they conclude that, by not being able to contextualize the messages that have been made public with the rest of the content of the chat (according to the Provincial Information Brigade because it is a private conversation), they “constitute only the externalization of an opposition to indeterminate actions and to the general government “.
Thus, he interprets them as a “severe” criticism framed in the right to freedom of expression and opinion, “constituted as institutional guarantees of public debate and which allows the formation of a free public opinion”.
In this way, they conclude that freedom of expression has a field of action “wider” than freedom of information, “which refers to the narration of facts which may be opposed”.