Receipt of these invitations Avaaz.org. This campaign has 150,000 signatures "demanding to ensure the independence of the judiciary and respect for the laws applicable in the case against Judge Garzon, signatures will be delivered in the day in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Judicial Council . I have replied to the sender the following paragraphs, which summarize my position on this sad case.
------ Dear Luis (and co-Avaaz):
presented the case as if Garzon was the victim of an arbitrary perpetrated for ideological reasons. Nothing is further from the truth.
is not true that, as they say, international law aside the Human Rights Act 1977 amnesty. At that time Spain had not ratified any treaty or convention that obliges the state to prosecute those crimes, so that the amnesty law was perfectly valid at the time and extinguished the corresponding criminal liability. The Constitution, moreover, provides arguments against the repeal of the Amnesty Law, Article 9.3 provides the non-retroactivity of punitive provisions are not favorable or restrictive of individual rights. The Constitutional Court has never doubted the constitutionality of the amnesty law, which still is valid for all purposes under views and opinions. English all the signs were the generous amnesty law as an end to war and dictatorship. A law which, incidentally, was in his day with the congratulations of people suspected of sympathy as little as Santiago Carrillo Franco and allowed direct his life in a democracy to former criminals on both sides. Nobody is going to justify the crimes of war and the Franco regime, but in the transition we found an instrument of mutual forgiveness Spain has brought very positive results.
anyway If not, Garzón not be the only judge to be perceived. Missing Garzon, the judicial system will provide an alternate process may continue open. Forgive me, but suggest that it Garzon suspended to prevent the investigation of the plot Gürtel insults the intelligence of the citizens.
The truth is that Judge Garzon has to ride roughshod law. There is no crime worse than that committed by those who, having committed to enforcing the law, knowingly violate them. It is called transgression, and if there does not matter who has said a group of right-wing, ultra-left group or association stamp. Transgression will be or not according to objective criteria, not ideological. Personally I think Garzón has done great services to Spain, but also that it has been thought over of law and decorum. Order the death certificate of Francisco Franco was just the funniest episode of madness.
Moreover, there is nothing more undemocratic than questioning the legitimacy of the institutions if their actions do not match our vision of things, and pretend that a popular change the course of a judicial process is simply a coup. The rule of law requires, precisely, that the law is enforced even when we do not like the consequences. So sometimes an ETA is free that no one understands that it is free, but if we are a democracy, laws must be fulfilled in all cases. With an ETA or a judge Franco. In fact, items footnotes of your message may add hundreds of articles by experts who claim processing impeccable judge. In any case, democracy does not consist in the fact that everyone thinks of what you do not understand, but that all institutions abide by what we found that among all handed down on what is in its strict knowledge and competence. The asamblearismo is never democratic. One million persons charged sentimental reasons but ignorant of the law demonstrated outside the door of the Supreme Court would not change one iota the legitimacy of this or the truth of his statements.
will understand that it can not sign or spread your proposal. It seems a step in the drift guerracivilista our politicians, especially those on the left, have undertaken since our foolish president of government was determined to return to 1936. There are crises and corruption that impairs our democracy, because both can fight from strong institutions, is the weakness of institutions and our immaturity as a nation which puts us on the brink of banana republic, and the crisis and corruption are largely consequences. A great demonstration of that immaturity is precisely the systematic questioning of the highest courts in recent years by individuals and institutions with varied ideological reasons (Where statute, case Garzón).
I can not sign and, moreover, I urge you to reconsider and withdraw the initiative, if you care more about peace and justice than revenge.
Best Regards. Digital Journalist .
