The Belgian Court of Cassation he has canceled this tuesday the ruling that rejected the delivery of the Majorcan rapper Josep Miquel Arenas, known as Valtonyc. The case will have to return to the Ghent Court of Appeal, legal sources have informed Europa Press.
The last Belgian judicial instance has asked to re-examine the question of the insults to the monarch, one of the crimes for which the Spanish authorities claimed the Balearic singer, also sentenced in Spain forthreats and glorification of terrorism. Now his case must be tried again by a different court in Ghent, made up of other judges, the sources consulted have explained. This resolution will further lengthen the case against the singer, which has lasted almost a decade.
The ‘Valtonyc case’
At the age of 18, the young Majorcan was arrested and accused of glorifying terrorism and insulting the crown for his songs. The National Court sentenced him to three and a half years in prison for praising terrorism, insulting the crown and threats, a decision that was later ratified by the Supreme Court.
Valtònyc went to Belgium in 2018 and since then the Spanish justice has demanded his extradition.
On December 28, the Ghent Court of Appeal rejected in second instance the surrender in Spain, considering that none of the three crimes is punishable in Belgium. To accept a euroorder, the crimes must be comparable in the country that is examining the extradition request, according to European regulations.
In the case of glorification of terrorism, the Ghent Court of Appeal said that it does not exist under Belgian law. In fact, he previously asked the EU Court of Justice if he could accept speedy extradition for this crime, as requested by the Spanish authorities. Luxemburg said no and therefore concluded that the conduct “is not punishable” in Belgium.
In relation to the crime of insults in the crown, the Ghent court points out that there is a Belgian law of insults in the king, which dates from 1847 and imposes penalties of up to 3 years in prison. The same court, however, had doubts about its application and asked the Constitutional Court about its legality. The Belgian TC ruled that it was unconstitutional because it does not respect freedom of expression and contravenes the European Convention on Human Rights.” Defamation and insults in the crown are not punished by any other provision than this law in Belgian domestic law,” he stresses. the sentence at the time of ruling out extradition for this crime. And it adds: “The fundamental rights of the interested person (including their right to freedom of expression) would be violated if they were released based on the aforementioned legal provision.”
Finally, the Ghent court holds that Valtònyc’s “verbal” threats did not impose any “conditions” and therefore are not a crime in Belgium either. “Consequently, this court rejects the execution of the mandates”, concludes the sentence, confirming the resolution in the first instance of the Belgian justice.
Related news
Prosecutor’s reaction
The Belgian prosecutor’s office considers that the Ghent Court of Appeal did not sufficiently justify its sentence and believes that glorification of terrorism and insults in the crown do have an equivalent in Belgian law. As explained by Valtònyc’s lawyer Simon Bekaert, in view of last week the Belgian prosecutor argued that the Ghent Court of Appeal should have “requalified” the crimes to make them equal to Belgian law. Specifically, he would have asked that the praise of terrorism be equated with incitement to terrorism and insults in the crown with common insults. “Valtònyc was not convicted of these crimes. The sentence cannot be rewritten,” Bekaert replied, recalling that the Belgian authorities they have no “competence” to do this.
.
ttn-24