Ten days after passage fraudulently, first of so-called laws breakthrough of disconnection in Parliament, Catalonia is living a contradictory situation and perplexing double authority and double legality. On one hand, for almost all aspects of daily life, governed by democratic order. They comply with Constitution and Estatut and all of regulations derived. But for political life, institutional functioning and radio and television public autonomous govern or rules, legitimately suspended by only one who can do so, Constitutional Court, and in virtue of which suspension all noncompliance constitutes an illegal act.Editorial previous
The secession of Catalonia, seen from THE COUNTRY
Not that re are two legalities parallel, similar legitimacy, among which can be chosen most convenient, as if it were a menu in a variety of offerings equivalent. Because democratic rule re is only one, deriving block legal constitutionality: Constitution and Estatut. But this comes coexisting in practice with an appearance of institutionalism, with an illusion of rules, a ghostly legality alternative based on facts, blow parliamentary (prolonged closure of Camera) and contempt of Estatut.
The drivers of se events are intended culminating in a proclamation of unilateral independence, which attacks frontally against domestic and international law. And that would come after alleged holding of a referendum illegal, orphan of democratic requirement. And whose celebration would be impossible in any of countries of democratic Europe mainland, because ir Constitutions prohibit without exception such experiments. Let us say it clearly once more: right of self-determination demanded by pro-independence is not recognised by any democratic country in world.
But if illegality of invention is well established and re is no doubt about it —not even among separatists, although only support in intimacy, all associations of judges, which both disagree on many issues, just remarcarlo, pointing out that a Government that orders to enforce law lacks legitimacy and ceases at that moment to be in authority: and that citizens can and must resist its dictates.
Against legality of bylaw stands a illegal but apparently ‘normal’
The Government is parapeta behind his power to give appearance of legality to illegal acts that he commits. In front of that, a democratic State of law has to operate within law, acting on facts illegal as y are committing, deploying instruments in a reasonable way, urging, warning: combining effectiveness and prudence. The result of this dynamic is an apparent tie. Which generates an intolerable legal uncertainty to citizens: conminados to form part of electoral tables, and alerted that doing so is a criminal offence.
The case is that Government has managed to endow his insubordination of apparent normality, although in deficit. And Government manages to scrap elements of illegality, but do not turn off your entire building. So many mayors, provided local to illegal act, but are called to testify; many ors, who obey law receive threats from Government; police requisition posters, but it does not detect ballot box (if re is one); judge cancelled website of government but Government of clones, although ir dúplicas have to reach very bottom; sindicatura electoral (substitute of board legal) is conminada to dissolve, but it only avoids to meet in Parliament; ads proreferéndum received in press, but not posters in buses. And rallies of election campaign is still celebrating: activism of president Puigdemont in m it breaks rule of Council of Europe, which imposed a certain neutrality to rulers, yes, but above all constitutes a mule to justice to try to repress or stop.
Puigdemont is lavished on illegal acts, as if he wished to overturn award to be repressed or stopped
Quite a few of limitations of rule of law derive from democratic principles and values. Only dictatorships (and those who aspire to mount an autocratic State, as secesionismo) are skipped, even to his standards. In Spain, re are separation of powers and independent courts that are guided by principles of legality and proportionality.
The Government has built a scaffolding pseudoinstitucional complex and fraudulent: dismantling it is not easy —a lot less than what is claimed from Government, but re is no more remedy that will do so, if you want to avoid end of autonomy and abrogation of Constitution by way of facts. The tie between democratic order and chaos is an impossibility. It is not stable. It is not sustainable. And above all, it is not acceptable. The Government should not allow that legality parallel to continue to implement and reach to win legitimacy among citizens, confused at this stage of crisis. Maybe I should not have allowed that legality arises in first instance; but from n, with logic and proper caution, not to consent to settle.
you Can follow THE COUNTRY's Opinion on Facebook, Twitter or subscribe here to Newsletter.