Historical Memory Is Frustrated In The Constitution

2021-01-28   |   by CusiGO

Historical memory lost a battle in the constitution. The safeguard court has ended its efforts to investigate torture cases during the Franco period. At this week’s plenary session, the constitution voted eight in favor and three against, arguing that the amnesty law prevented a reconsideration of these facts, which will also be stipulated.

The case was brought by Gerardo Iglesias, the former PCE secretary general, who filed a lawsuit in Asturias in 2018 accusing members of Oviedo’s social and political brigade of torturing him in the 1970s. The provincial court rejected the case and Iglesias applied to the constitutional court for constitutional protection. After more than two hours of debate, the guarantee court ruled by a majority vote that the ruling did not infringe the rights of the former EPC leader, because the ruling rejecting his appeal was a reasonable response to the refusal to investigate the facts.

The constitution supports this file because the reported incident occurred nearly 50 years ago, when the crimes against humanity mentioned in the complaint were not included in the criminal code until 2003. The judgment held that since the Constitution itself prohibited retroactive application, it could not be considered a crime. Most also agree that the amnesty act of 77 prohibits the prosecution of such acts, which, in any case, are already prescribed.

The court’s vice president, nkanacion Roca, and judges, Juan Antonio Hill and Maria Luisa Balaguer, disagree and will vote individually. His argument is that the work of restoring historical memory must include clarifying facts of this nature. In his view, there is a social debate about the effectiveness of the amnesty law. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that the court must deal with such cases, and it is possible to rule on the law in accordance with historical memory and international law.