State Lawyers Asked For Clarification As To Whether The Misappropriated Money Had Been Returned In The Course Of The Decision To Pardon The Convicted

2021-02-10   |   by CusiGO

The Attorney General of the state believes that in his report on possible amnesties for convicted persons, it is necessary to clarify in advance whether they have compensated the state for funds misappropriated during the independence process. This was mentioned by lawyers in a letter to the Supreme Court, He asked to be interested in the status of the files he directed before the court of audit concerning the misappropriation of funds by independent leaders for the holding and conduct of the illegal 1-O referendum and unilateral declaration of independence.

He argues that the lawyers of the state acting in the case are the de facto “injured party” on the grounds that “the funds and financing mechanisms established by the state have been misappropriated and deviated from the agreed purpose”. Therefore, as explained in the letter, the report he is now responsible for drafting on the possibility of amnesty for those convicted in the case “requests the sentencing court to appeal to the court of audit for information in order to best clarify the amount of funds misappropriated Public. ” All of this is to determine “in particular, whether the funds have been returned or, where appropriate, whether they have been guaranteed or strengthened”.

The request for such information is in line with the strategy agreed by the national legal community as to what the focus of its report on pardoning convicted persons should be. According to his role as representative of financial interests in the matter at hand.

Sources in the national legal community stressed that if the convicted person is proved to have facilitated the state’s compensation for misappropriated funds, His report on amnesty will see this fact as a positive factor, which the government should take into account when deciding whether to agree to all or part of the amnesty measures. In any case, the bar association’s report is clearly far from that of the prosecutor’s office, which warned that Amnesty cannot be used as a “political currency” and that it strongly opposes amnesty because of the seriousness of the events described in the Supreme Court’s decision.

According to the National Bar Association, at this early stage, it knew that “Interim liquidation records should have been submitted to the court to meet the” accounting liability “of the accused. In addition, it noted that these records would be guaranteed or strengthened. Liquidation. ” The purpose of the law firm was to prove these cases, as it was informed that “on January 28, 2020, a provisional liquidation bill was drafted for the costs of holding an illegal 1-O referendum in Catalonia, and the provisional liquidation amount was A the loss of public funds is 4156274.97 euro and the interest is 242980.11 euro. ”

It stressed that national lawyers must clarify whether “liquidation that could have been transferred is paid in whole or in part or at least guaranteed or guaranteed”. Thus, “in determining the facts that the parties and the judgment court must report,” State Counsel stressed, “the audit court should be required to report the determination of the transferred amount and the final claim.”. State counsel also stressed that “this information requirement is essential not only for the most appropriate identification of the amnesty file, but also for the proper publication of the party’s report.”