Puigdemont's Defense Argues for Catalan Court to Decide on Amnesty Application
The legal battle surrounding Carles Puigdemont and the amnesty law is taking a new turn. Gonzalo Boye, Puigdemont's lawyer, is currently advocating before the Supreme Court for the responsibility of deciding whether the amnesty applies to the former President of the Generalitat to be transferred to the High Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC). This plea is unfolding amidst differing interpretations of the amnesty law and its applicability to the charges against Puigdemont.
The Core of the Dispute: Jurisdiction and the Amnesty Law
Boye's argument centers on the belief that the TSJC is the appropriate venue to decide on the amnesty's application. He highlights that neither Puigdemont nor Toni Comín, who is also represented by Boye, currently hold positions as Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). According to Boye, the law stipulates that the competent judge to hear the case should be the one that is currently instructing it, and because Puigdemont is a member of the Catalan Parliament, the TSJC should be responsible and have final say.
«The competence rests with the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia,» Boye asserted, emphasizing his view that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction in this specific matter.
Diverging Opinions: Prosecution and State Advocacy
Adding complexity to the situation, the Prosecutor's Office and the State Attorney's Office are both urging the Supreme Court to grant amnesty to Puigdemont, Comín, and Lluís Puig. These three are being prosecuted while in absentia by the Supreme Court. These opinions contradict the initial stance of the Supreme Court, which had previously denied amnesty, arguing that the law excludes the type of embezzlement attributed to the leaders of the *procés*.
The Supreme Court's Stance and Potential Appeals
The Supreme Court convened on Monday to review the appeals filed by Puigdemont, Comín, and Puig against Judge Pablo Llarena's decision not to grant them amnesty for embezzlement. According to Reyes Rincón (2025), it is unlikely that the court will accept the appeals, as the Criminal Chamber has already raised a question of unconstitutionality, expressing doubts about the amnesty law's validity for those involved in the *procés*.
Should the Supreme Court reject the appeals, Puigdemont and the other two former ministers will have the option to appeal to the Constitutional Court. This court has already accepted the first appeals for protection from those convicted in the 1-O referendum who were denied amnesty, including former Vice President of the Generalitat Oriol Junqueras and former ministers Raül Romeva and Dolors Bassa.
The Argument Against Patrimonial Enrichment
Boye also aligns himself with the dissenting opinion of Judge Ana Ferrer, who opposed the court's decision to deny amnesty for embezzlement to those convicted in the *procés*, like Junqueras, Romeva, Turull and Bassa. Ferrer highlighted that the court had never found evidence of personal enrichment, saying that «Neither in judgment 459/2019, of October 14, nor in order 20107/2023, February 13, did we mention any possible personal benefit of a patrimonial nature of those who in the *procés* case were convicted as perpetrators of a crime of embezzlement» (Ferrer, as cited in Reyes Rincón, 2025).
Looking Ahead
The coming weeks will likely be critical in determining the fate of Carles Puigdemont and the other individuals involved in this legal challenge. The decisions made by the Supreme Court and potentially the Constitutional Court will have significant implications for the amnesty law and its impact on the *procés* participants.
The arguments presented by Gonzalo Boye, along with the differing opinions within the Spanish judicial system, underscore the complexities and sensitivities surrounding this case. As the legal process unfolds, the eyes of many will continue to be on Spain as it navigates this difficult chapter in its history.
References
- Rincón, R. (2025, March 10). El abogado de Puigdemont pide al Supremo que deje en manos de la justicia catalana la decisión de si le aplica la amnistía. El País.
