THE COUNTRY: The Court decides today whether to keep universal justice alive

16 magistrates will decide on the cases of Tibet and Couso

Maria Fabra Madrid 5 JUN 2014 – 20:40 CET

Los 16 magistrates who make up the plenary session of the criminal chamber of the National Court will decide this morning if they keep alive universal justice, the rule that allows persecution of the executioners of all Spanish victims. The express reform of the PP has sought to limit that capacity so as not to provoke a conflict with China, following the arrest order of former President Jiang Zemin and former Prime Minister Li Peng for crimes of genocide, torture and crimes against humanity against the population of Tibet, among whom there was a lama of Spanish nationality. But with the changes, The PP not only hindered this procedure but also another dozen cases that are processed under the protection of universal justice..

The full debate, divided, what to do both in the case of Tibet as in that of the death of cameraman José Couso at the hands of American soldiers during the Iraq war. These two cases concentrate the typology of the dozen cases opened in the National Court and on which the magistrates make different interpretations of the law..

There is a sector that maintains that the reform requires the filing of all cases that are processed under the umbrella of this norm. Another part of the plenary session points out that, although the law does not, the Geneva Convention (obligatory compliance because this is stated in the Spanish Constitution) establishes the obligation to investigate and prosecute war crimes, among which would be found the Couso case. The magistrates included in this group consider, however, that international treaties are not so explicit about the jurisdiction of States regarding the crime of genocide attributed to the cause of Tibet.. Nevertheless, They will have to consider that although the complaint was filed for genocide, in 2011 was expanded with another accusation that could be included in war crimes.

The third of the sectors of the divided plenary session points out that international agreements and treaties grant Spain sufficient competence to continue processing all cases. They make up the group that considers that victims cannot have different treatment depending on the crime to which they have been subjected., since the reform does allow persecution of the executioner of any Spaniard who suffers a terrorist attack abroad, but victims of torture must prove that their alleged torturer is in Spain.

The plenary session will also address the release of five alleged drug traffickers arrested in March 2013 on a ship outside Spanish territorial waters with 1,7 tons of cocaine valued at 60 Millions of euros. The court has already ruled on the cases of the narcobarcos and , by 13 votes against three, concluded that the reform of universal justice makes it impossible to continue pursuing this type of crimes. This majority cannot be extrapolated to the other causes on which the plenary session is more divided.. Although the Court's decision will not be completely final —since cases can end up in the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court— The decision of the plenary session is relevant because it will determine the commitment to universal justice and spaces of impunity and will tip the balance between interests and values.

Belgium, Australia, Canada, Austria, Germany, Denmark, USA, Norway, Portugal, France, Israel and Switzerland are some of the countries that, to a greater or lesser extent, have applied and prosecuted crimes in application of universal jurisdiction. The professor of International Law at the Rovira i Virgili University of Tarragona, Antoni Pigrau, assures that Spain was one of the most advanced countries in the application of this norm and that the new law “imposes restrictions on the prosecution of crimes against humanity that are higher than those established by international conventions.”, "that have a higher rank than the law". “There is an international consensus that war crimes, Crimes against humanity and genocide are the most serious categories in humanitarian law. Well, these three categories are the ones whose persecution is most intensely restricted with the new law.. The norm has a lot of weak points”, adds Pigrau.