NEWS
The trial in which judge Baltasar Garzón is accused of overstepping the boundaries of duty for trying to investigate crimes committed during the Franco regime
29.01.12 - 17:43 -
Support. Around 300 people gathered outside the court. AFP
Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and hundreds of protestors carrying photos of dead ancestors... The trial against Judge Baltasar Garzón this week attracted attention from all over the world, both for the fame of the defendant and the nature of the case.
Garzón shot into the international limelight in 1998 when he had former Chilean rule Augusto Pinochet arrested in London. This was his second trial in as many weeks. Last Thursday saw the completion of the case in which he is charged with illegally authorising the tapping of phone conversations between suspects and their lawyers in the Gürtel corruption investigation.
While magistrates decide on a verdict for this first case the high profile judge now faces accusations of violating an amnesty law by trying to investigate crimes committed during the Franco regime. The case was brought by the Manos Limpias organisation, a far right pseudo-trade union for public employees, which now has around 6,000 members. They accuse Garzón of violating the amnesty law passed in 1977, two years after the death of Franco, aimed at allowing Spain to get on with its Transition without dwelling on the past.
However Manos Limpios are fighting a lone battle. There is no public or private prosecution; in fact State Prosecutor Luis Navajas joined Garzón’s lawyer in his calls for the case to be annulled. They quoted a precedent labelled the ‘Botín doctrine’ that establishes that a ‘popular accusation’ (when the plaintiff bringing the action to court is not the direct victim of the alleged crime but is defending rights on behalf of the people) is insufficient to sustain a case when there is no public prosecution.
In fact prosecutor Luis Navajas attacked the role of Judge Luciano Varela who had admitted the case to court, describing his actions as “indefensible”. “In 36 years of career, I have never seen anything like it”, he said. Both Navajas and Garzón’s lawyer brought up the fact that the first case presented by Manos Limpias had been rejected by the judge but he had ‘advised’ them how to rewrite it to make it viable. Garzón’s lawyer claimed that the advice was so obvious that the Manos Limpias lawyers had “copied and pasted” the judge’s text in the revised version, including the mistakes.
The Manos Limpias lawyer said that his organisation was merely defending “public interest” and making sure that the judge was not breaking the law by investigating crimes committed during the dictatorship.
International interest
Tuesday’s session in Madrid was followed in court by several observers from international human rights organisations. Amnesty International’s legal adviser, Hugo Relva, stressed that what is most surprising about the trial is that the Spanish judiciary is questioning international law. Meanwhile Reed Brody of Human Rights Watch maintained that Varela’s case was “absolutely indefensible”.
This case against Garzón is on paper a technical debate about the interpretation of the law. However it could lead to the end of this controversial judge’s career. Ironically so far in Spain the only person to appear in court in any way in connection with the crimes of the Franco regime is the very man who tried to investigate them.
