The ministry asks to close the genocide case in which Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin are accused
It says that the Criminal Chamber can file it or present a question of constitutionality
Fernando J. Pérez Madrid 20 MAR 2014
The Prosecutor's Office of the National Court continues to insist on the idea that the legal reform that limits universal justice violates the Constitution. And it does so in the case that has caused the PP to accelerate legislative times to undermine the capacity of Spanish judges to investigate crimes against humanity that occurred outside the national territory.: the case against the leadership of the Chinese regime for the genocide in Tibet in the years 80 and 90 of the last century. This summary has as defendants the former presidents of the Asian giant Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. An international arrest warrant weighs on the latter.
The prosecutor has sent Judge Ismael Moreno a letter in which he requests that he conclude the summary on Tibet to submit it to the Criminal Chamber of the National Court., court that must decide whether to archive the proceedings –How the legal reform promoted by the PP imposes. The public ministry also points out that the court can “adopt the decision it deems appropriate in relation to the constitutionality of the aforementioned regulations.”, in reference to the Organic Law of the Judiciary that restricts universal justice and establishes that “the case will be dismissed” those causes that do not fit the requirements of the new regulations.
As he already did with the Couso case, The prosecutor's office recalls that the power to archive or continue with an investigation in the summary procedure –in which crimes punishable by more than nine years in prison are investigated- It is up to the court that has to prosecute them. The public prosecution considers that the “new procedural procedure established by the reform” –automatic dismissal- “must be accommodated to the functional competition system” provided for in the Criminal Procedure Law. And remember that the decision to archive corresponds “clearly” to the Criminal Chamber of the Court.
Last Wednesday, in an appeal against the decision of Judge Santiago Pedraz to continue with the Couso case and reject the possibility of filing a question of unconstitutionality before the Constitutional Court, the prosecution wrote: “The new organic regulatory standards [of universal justice] (…) may involve a violation of the rights to effective judicial protection and access to jurisdiction enshrined in article 24 of the Constitution, and the principle of judicial independence”, of the article 117 of the fundamental law.
