Ousted Catalan leader says will not return to Spain to testify

[webfact]

Ousted Catalan leader says will not return to Spain to testify

By Paul Day

 

Sacked Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont attends a news conference at the Press Club Brussels Europe in Brussels, Belgium, October 31, 2017. REUTERS/Yves Herman

 

MADRID (Reuters) - Dismissed Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont said on Wednesday he would ignore a court order to return to Spain to answer charges over the region's push for independence, but he could testify from Belgium.

 

If Puigdemont fails to answer Thursday's High Court summons, an arrest warrant could be issued that would make it virtually impossible for him to stand in a snap regional election called by the Spanish government for Dec. 21.

 

Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy sacked Puigdemont and his government on Friday, hours after the Catalan parliament made a unilateral declaration of independence in a vote boycotted by the opposition and declared illegal by Spanish courts.

 

On Monday, Spain's state prosecutor filed charges of rebellion, sedition and misuse of public funds against Puigdemont for defying the central government by holding an referendum on secession on Oct. 1 and proclaiming independence.

 

Puigdemont travelled to Belgium at the weekend with other members of the dismissed Catalan administration and hired a lawyer.

 

"Those summonses are part of proceedings that lack any legal basis and only seek to punish ideas. This is a political trial," Puigdemont said in a statement signed by "the legitimate government of Catalonia".

 

The High Court summoned Puigdemont and 13 other former members of the Catalan government to testify in Madrid on Thursday and Friday on the prosecutor's charges.

 

A judge will then decide whether those called to testify should go to jail pending an investigation that could take several years and potentially lead to a trial. The judge might also grant them conditional bail or order them to surrender their passports.

 

If Puigdemont and his associates did not turn up, the judge would be more likely to order them jailed as a flight risk.

 

The courts have also told the Catalan secessionist leaders to deposit 6.2 million euros (5.44 million pounds) by Friday to cover potential liabilities.

 

"OFF TO PRISON"?

 

Three former Catalan government advisors returned to Spain from Belgium late on Tuesday and were greeted at Barcelona's international airport by a small crowd chanting "off to prison".

 

Puigdemont said on Tuesday he would only go back to Spain when given unspecified "guarantees" by the Spanish government. He said he accepted the election called by Rajoy for December and Madrid said he was welcome to stand, though the legal proceedings might prevent that.

 

Uncertainty over how the crisis will play out has prompted more than 1,800 Catalonia-based companies to move their legal headquarters out of the region and the government to lower its national economic forecasts for next year.

 

On Wednesday, rating agency Moody's said the declaration of independence and the suspension of self rule were credit negative for the region and the country, and that associated uncertainty would damage sentiment and consumer spending.

 

Moody's raised Spain's credit rating to Baa2 in 2014 as the country emerged from a prolonged economic slump.

 

On Tuesday, Moody's affirmed Catalonia's long-term issuer and debt ratings of Ba3, saying the government's reinforced control compensated for the increased risks, in particular the region's rapidly deteriorating business climate.

 

(Additional reporting by Emma Pinedo, Hortense de Roffignac in Tielt and Foon Yun Chee in Brussels, Writing by Julien Toyer, Editing by Angus MacSwan and John Stonestreet)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-02

[phantomfiddler]

The realization sets in :) Good riddance to him !

[Baerboxer]

Ignores the courts to organize an illegal referendum. Illegally declares independence from Spain. Now defies the courts and flees the consequences.

 

A criminal. 

[nickmondo]

what an idiot!

another lunatic out of the way with a bit of luck.

 

[impulse]

28 minutes ago, nickmondo said:

what an idiot!

another lunatic out of the way with a bit of luck.

 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

Ignores the courts to organize an illegal referendum. Illegally declares independence from Spain. Now defies the courts and flees the consequences.

 

A criminal. 

 

If he's a criminal and a lunatic, how is it that the majority of Catalonians seemed to agree with him?

 

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

 

If he's a criminal and a lunatic, how is it that the majority of Catalonians seemed to agree with him?

 

Let's see at the 21 December legal election

 

How could the twit hope to win with a haircut like that? Not exactly Che Guevara!

[vogie]

7 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

 

If he's a criminal and a lunatic, how is it that the majority of Catalonians seemed to agree with him?

 

But the majority of the Spanish didn't agree with him, Catalonia is still part of Spain is it not?

[impulse]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

But the majority of the Spanish didn't agree with him, Catalonia is still part of Spain is it not?

 

You mean today?

 

To be clear, I don't have a dog in the fight.  Or a clue.  But if more than half the people agree to secede, maybe he's forcing some action on a festering issue.  And that's how democracy works- at least that's how it worked back in Texas- which was part of Mexico at one time...  And the majority of Mexicans probably didn't agree with Sam Houston, either.  Thank God the Texicans didn't let that stop 'em.

 

[farcanell]

I think it’s more of a dummy spit than an example of democracy at work

 

but now both baby and bath water have gone out the window.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

 

If he's a criminal and a lunatic, how is it that the majority of Catalonians seemed to agree with him?

 

 

Seemed how?

[impulse]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

1 hour ago, impulse said:

If he's a criminal and a lunatic, how is it that the majority of Catalonians seemed to agree with him?

Seemed how?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_referendum,_2017

[Tarteso]

Like his lawyer says;
“Now the cat is in the tree”

[Morch]

22 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_referendum,_2017

 

From the link above (but you already knew that):

 

Registered voters/turnout

5,313,564

43.03%

[impulse]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

From the link above (but you already knew that):

 

Registered voters/turnout

5,313,564

43.03%

 

Statistics 101 will tell you that a sample of 43% in a population that big, where 92% voted one way- can be extrapolated to a majority with pretty much 100% certainty. 

 

Maybe not a 92% majority, and it's not valid if the Nay voters were held off at gunpoint, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

And again, I don't claim to be up on the issues, etc.   I suspect it's just another one of the many borders around the world that were fixed after WWII as the colonial empires collapsed, with no regard to the will of the people living within those borders.  Probably as a "Thank You" to Franco for staying neutral and not attacking Gibraltar when the Brits really needed it.

 

[Morch]

13 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Statistics 101 will tell you that a sample of 43% in a population that big, where 92% voted one way- can be extrapolated to a majority with pretty much 100% certainty. 

 

Maybe not a 92% majority, and it's not valid if the Nay voters were held off at gunpoint, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

And again, I don't claim to be up on the issues, etc.   I suspect it's just another one of the many borders around the world that were fixed after WWII as the colonial empires collapsed, with no regard to the will of the people living within those borders.  Probably as a "Thank You" to Franco for staying neutral and not attacking Gibraltar when the Brits really needed it.

 

 

What you initially posted cannot be deduced from the figures. There was a vote, most people didn't vote. That's the short and long of it. Many of those who didn't vote were said to oppose the independence drive. I guess that doesn't seat all too well with some posters' politics, but it is what it is.

 

Doubt what you supposedly "suspect" (more like beating the same old drum) is germane to the topic.

[mfd101]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

I suspect it's just another one of the many borders around the world that were fixed after WWII as the colonial empires collapsed, with no regard to the will of the people living within those borders.  Probably as a "Thank You" to Franco for staying neutral and not attacking Gibraltar when the Brits really needed it.

Oh rilly? An interesting version of history.

 

I think you'll find the borders were already there when Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile got married in 1479. Just a few years before WW2. But who cares? it's all in the past, whatever ...

[impulse]

17 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Oh rilly? An interesting version of history.

 

I think you'll find the borders were already there when Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile got married in 1479. Just a few years before WW2. But who cares? it's all in the past, whatever ...

 

And I suppose the Spanish Civil War didn't result in any population movement that may have made redrawing the borders appropriate?  Wonder how a vote would have gone, if Franco had been inclined to allow anyone a say...  92% in favor of seceding didn't happen in 60 or 70 years...

 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by impulse

[RuamRudy]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

What you initially posted cannot be deduced from the figures. There was a vote, most people didn't vote. That's the short and long of it. Many of those who didn't vote were said to oppose the independence drive. I guess that doesn't seat all too well with some posters' politics, but it is what it is.

 

Is there verifiable data which confirms how many people were boycotting the referendum, how many intended to vote but were unable to do so because the polling facilities were confiscated or destroyed, and how many were put off by the sight of Spanish policemen attacking men and women indiscriminately?

 

 

If not, then there are too many unknowns to say whether the poll would have been successful or otherwise. When you write 'Many of those who didn't vote were said to oppose the independence drive', this carries no more legitimacy than the statement 'Many of those who didn't vote were said to support the independence drive'.

 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Is there verifiable data which confirms how many people were boycotting the referendum, how many intended to vote but were unable to do so because the polling facilities were confiscated or destroyed, and how many were put off by the sight of Spanish policemen attacking men and women indiscriminately?

 

 

If not, then there are too many unknowns to say whether the poll would have been successful or otherwise. When you write 'Many of those who didn't vote were said to oppose the independence drive', this carries no more legitimacy than the statement 'Many of those who didn't vote were said to support the independence drive'.

 

 

About as verifiable as the comment I addressed. To make things clear - I wasn't the one building castles in the air based on the results and related figures. I'm sure you can put the bit quoted in context of the the post I was responding to.

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Statistics 101 will tell you that a sample of 43% in a population that big, where 92% voted one way- can be extrapolated to a majority with pretty much 100% certainty. 

 

Maybe not a 92% majority, and it's not valid if the Nay voters were held off at gunpoint, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

And again, I don't claim to be up on the issues, etc.   I suspect it's just another one of the many borders around the world that were fixed after WWII as the colonial empires collapsed, with no regard to the will of the people living within those borders.  Probably as a "Thank You" to Franco for staying neutral and not attacking Gibraltar when the Brits really needed it.

 

Not really, the 43% Sample was not normalised; many of those who didn't vote boycotted it

 

Frankly, it was probably about 50/50 as it has been for years. Not enough for constitutional change

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, impulse said:

 

And I suppose the Spanish Civil War didn't result in any population movement that may have made redrawing the borders appropriate?  Wonder how a vote would have gone, if Franco had been inclined to allow anyone a say...  92% in favor of seceding didn't happen in 60 or 70 years...

 

 

You have to read up on it. Complicated but fascinating ?

[RuamRudy]

14 hours ago, Grouse said:

You have to read up on it. Complicated but fascinating ?

And who would have thought it - the British having had a hand in sowing discord on foreign shores.