The possible granting of a amnesty to prosecuted or convicted pro-independence activists is today the great debate. On the one hand, there are opponents who range from politicians with great projection and different ideology, such as Núñez Feijóo and Felipe González, to all those who fear that it would be agreeing with those who wanted to break the Constitution, which could encourage a return to the drama of 2017. On the other hand, those who believe that the amnesty does not pose constitutional problems and that it is necessary to close the Catalan conflict. The maximum exponent is Yolanda Diaz, that upon meeting in Brussels with Puigdemont as if they were old friends and in the company of Jaume Asens – a defender of the amnesty and with a great relationship with Waterloo – came to say that the amnesty was not only convenient, but a fact. Not in vain is she the vice president and the necessary partner of Pedro Sánchez. And here may be the Government itself that, although it distances itself, does not disavow Yolanda Díaz and knows that amnesty is a condition for the investiture.
All positions have their reasons, but The main issue is not so much legal as political, as you said Juan Antonio Xiol, who was vice president of the Constitutional Court, in a very discreet statement. It is true that the Constitution did not accept the professor’s amendment Tender Galvan that he wanted to include it, but he didn’t prohibit it either. And unlike yes prohibited general pardon, The amnesty would not be a decision of the Executive, but of the Cortes Generales that embody national sovereignty. That is why they dictate the laws, above the executive and judicial powers, as long as they respect the Constitution. More consideration deserves doubts about equality, although a political conflict is always very special, and about the protection of those who have filed legal actions, as Professor Xavier Arbós has highlighted in this newspaper.
Decided by a solid and stable majority, it would have much more justification than what is now proposed, which would be a simple barter: amnesty for Puigdemont and the independence movement in exchange for a new investiture of Pedro Sánchez.
The problem is political. The amnesty can serve to close a serious conflict – not necessarily a regime change – but it should be supported by a large parliamentary majority and the beneficiaries should commit to the legal security of the rule of law. And there is neither unanimity nor a large majority because the PP is against and Feijóo would have 172 deputies behind the 350 in Parliament. No matter the reasons, they are against it. Is it possible then that it be approved by a fair majority, of a maximum of 178 seats? It would be much more debatable.
True that The PP does not have veto power, nor should it have. But the experience exists. When a similar majority -against the right- imposed the reform of the Statute, The consequences were not positive and coexistence in Spain and Catalonia deteriorated. And the amnesty would be even more controversial because It would not be decided by a solid majority but rather the exchange of a pact for the investiture. Feijóo says it and it is like this: the left would amnesty the independence movement and thus could continue governing. ‘Realpolitik’ pure and simple.
This amnesty therefore has many points against it. But it is true that Catalonia is very different from that of 2017. For the application of 155 -which the independence movement accepted de facto by running (and winning) the elections called by Rajoy-, the lack of European and international support, and the subsequent pardon of Pedro Sánchez that changed the social climate. That is why it can be argued that – today – the events of 2017 cannot be repeated and that it would be positive to turn the page.
Related news
But an amnesty on the part – and with part of public opinion against it – cannot be based on conjectures. It should be clear that the amnestied are not the winners, but rather it is about turning the page and start a new stage in which the benefiting parties accept the rule of law. It is not so much about recognition the unfeasibility of the unilateral route -which is already clear after what happened-, but to solemnize that if all the ideas are legitimate -the independence movement not only stands for elections and governs in Catalonia-, the only thing that is illegitimate is attacking legal security.
Without this pact, the amnesty would not be understood. It is one thing to turn the page and another, very different, to go back. to a past that has contributed nothing to the freedom and progress of Catalonia.