State Legal Service's Indictment of 18 Catalans, 2 November 2018

This post consists of an unofficial English translation of the Spanish State Legal Service's* indictment of two social and sixteen political leaders involved in the bid to allow Catalonia to vote to decide its political future on October 1 2017. The charges were laid on November 2, 2018.
click here if need be

* = The chief public proscutor calls for even more severe jail sentences.

The original text is available here:

•  https://documentos.diaridegirona.cat/2018/11/acusacio-advocacia-estat-liders-proces.pdf

• https://issuu.com/mai706/docs/escrito_abogacia_proces/1?ff
• https://www.scribd.com/document/392199219/Escrito-de-la-Abogacia-del-Estado-sobre-el-Proces

...ooo000ooo...

MINISTRY
OF JUSTICE

STATE LEGAL SERVICE-

DIRECTION OF THE LEGAL SERVICE

OF THE STATE

SUB-DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR

DISPUTE SERVICES

PENAL DEPARTMENT

N.A.E. 81/18.
SPECIAL CASE 3/20907/2017.
4th Office.



TO THE SECOND CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT

THE STATE LAWYER, in the name and representation of the General State Administration, APPEARS before THE SECOND CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT and, according to legal procedure, HOLDS:

That on 25 October 2018 he was notified of the Court ruling of this same date which opened the oral arguments over the people that are cited, and ordered the dropping of charges against others and ordering its transfer to the prosecutors so that they formulate their writings of preliminary conclusions as laid down in Article 649 of the Law of Criminal Procedure.

That, in accordance with what is laid down in Article 650 of the Law of Criminal Procedure, by means of this text, I make this timely and orderly formulation to put forward the documented preliminary conclusions against:

• 1. Oriol Junqueras Vies, vice-president of the Autonomous Government and Minister of Economy and Treasury of the Generalitat of Catalonia at at the time the actions occurred.
• 2. Joaquim Forn Chiariello, Minister of the Department of Interior at the time the actions occurred.
• 3. Jordi Turull Negre, Minister of the Department of the Presidency at the time the actions occurred.
• 4. Raúl Romeva Rueda, Minister of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Institutional Relations and Transparency at the time the actions occurred.
• 5. Josep Rull Andreu, Minister of the Department of Territory and Sustainability at the time the actions occurred.
• 6. Dolors Bassa Coll, Minister of the Department of Labour, Social Affairs and Family at the time the actions occurred.
• 7. Meritxell Borrás Solé, Minister of the Department of Government, Public Administrations and House at the time the actions occurred.
• 8. Carles Mundó Blanch, Minister of the Department of Justice at the time the actions occurred.
• 9. Santiago Vila Vicente, Minister of the Department of Business and Knowledge at the time the actions occurred.
• 10. Jordi Sánchez Picanyol, President of the Catalan National Assembly (ANC) at the time the actions occurred.
• 11. Jordi Cuixart Navarro, President of Omnium Cultural (OC) at the time the actions occurred.
• 12. Carme Forcadell Lluis, Speaker of the Autonomous Parliament and of the Bureau at the time the actions occurred.
• 13. Lluis María Corominas Díaz, regional MP, first vice-president of the Bureau until July 2017 and president of the Junts pel Si parliamentary group at the time the actions occurred.
• 14. Lluis Guinó Subirás, regional MP and first vice-president of the Bureau, replacing the previous person listed, at the time the actions occurred.
• 15. Anna Simó Castelló, regional MP and first secretary of the Bureau at the time the actions occurred.
• 16. Ramona Barrufet Santacana, regional MP and fourth secretary of the Bureau at the time the actions occurred.
• 17. Joan Josep Nuet Pujals, regional MP and third secretary of the Bureau at the time the actions occurred.
• 18. Mireia Boya Busquets, chair of the CUP Parliamentary Group.

FIRST- Punishable actions

Defendant Oriol Junqueras Vies, in his capacity as Vice-president of the Generalitat and president of Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC); Carme Forcadell Lluis, first as President of the Catalan National Assembly (ANC) and later as Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia; Jordi Sánchez Picanyol, as president of ANC; and Jordi Cuixart Navarro, as president of Omnium Cultural, decided, as the main promoters, to put into practice a process that concluded with the holding of a self-determination referendum and, possibly, with the declaration of independence of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, without ruling out, in order to reach said aim, dispensing with the legal paths, breaking the laws or disobeying the legitimate mandates of the administrative or judicial authorities, and using, if necessary, social mobilisation. The agreement had three bases:

• 1) The parliamentary basis, whose function was to allow and facilitate the passage and adoption of openly illegal laws, for being unconstitutional, by means of apparent regulatory basis for holding the self-determination referendum and the potential declaration of independence, violating court orders from the Constitutional Court and of any other jurisdictional bodies
• 2) the executive basis, whose essential mission was the announcement and holding of an illegal referendum, and the creation and development of State structures
• 3) the social basis, through which the above-mentioned pro-independence organisations developed a crucial role by means of the popular mobilisation as an instrument of pressure to negotiate with the State.

In summary, the programmed plan fundamentally entailed a clash with these institutions and forces against the constitutional and statutory legality, preventing compliance with the administrative and court orders issued in this context, and organising social mobilisations to put pressure on the State.

Each one of defendants within his or her respective fields of responsibility, in each parliamentary or executive body, or within the activity of social agitation, but in a previous coordinated and synchronised way, participated in the implementation of the common plan, reacting to the development of the events as they occurred.

A) Actions inside the process designed to culminate in the declaration of independence of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia by the Government of the Generalitat and the Autonomous Parliament. The crime of sedition.

The coordination of all defendants was carried out through a long process of maturation and prior failed attempts.

1. Background of the actions and behaviour that are being prosecuted in this Special Case.

Let us begin the history of the actions with the holding, on 9 November 2014, of an illegal popular poll called by the then-President of the Generalitat of Catalonia, Artur Mas Gavarró.

In reality this process started on 19 December 2012, when Artur Mas Gavarró, then presidential candidate for the Generalitat of Catalonia and leader of the political party Convergence i Unió (CiU), signed with Oriol Junqueras Vies, president of the political party Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), the “agreement for the National Transition and to Guarantee the Stability of the Government of Catalonia”, whose 19 pages laid down the key guidelines of a pact for what was to be the 10th Term of office, including an agreement for the holding of a poll on independence in 2014.

Subsequently, and precisely as a consequence of the agreement between both political forces, the Parliament of Catalonia, in Resolution 5/X of 23 January 2013, approved a Declaration of Sovereignty and of the right to decide of the people of Catalonia. This Resolution established that “In accordance with the majority will expressed democratically by the people of Catalonia, the Parliament of Catalonia decides to initiate the process to make effective the exercise of the right to decide so that the citizens of Catalonia can decide their collective political future”, adding that “The people of Catalonia have, by reasons of democratic legitimacy, the character of a sovereign political and legal subject”.

The Government of the Nation challenged this Resolution of the Parliament, and the Constitutional Court, in its March 25 Judgment, No. 42/2014, declared it to be unconstitutional and invalid, stating that «The recognition to the people of Catalonia of the quality of sovereign is not contemplated in our Constitution for the nationalities and regions that make up the State, and is incompatible with article 2 CE, as it amounts to conferring to the one-sided subject of which it speaks the power to break, by its sole will, what the Constitution declares as its own foundation in the above-mentioned constitutional precept: the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation». It thus finished declaring unconstitutional and invalid the proclamation of the character of the people of Catalonia as a sovereign political and legal subject. The judgment also declared that the so-called «right to decide of the citizens of Catalonia» referred to in the Resolution could not be understood as a demonstration of a right to self-determination recognised in the Constitution, nor as an attribution of sovereignty recognised in it, but as a political aspiration which can only be attained by means of a process in accordance with constitutional legality (FJ 3).

It likewise proclaimed that “The unconditional primacy of the Constitution requires that all decisions of power are, without exception, subject to the Constitution, without there existing, for public powers, spaces free from the Constitution or fields of immunity in the face of it. In this way it also protects the democratic principle, as the guarantee of the integrity of the Constitution has to be seen, at the same time, as the preservation of the respect due to the popular will, in its aspect as a constituent power, the source of all legal-political legitimacy” (FJ 4.c). likewise it emphasized that «the autonomic State is based on the fundamental principle that our Constitution makes national sovereignty reside in the Spanish people (art. 1.2 CE), so that (...) it is not the result of a pact between historical territorial instances that conserve some rights prior to the Constitution and above it, but a norm of the constituent power that is imposed with general binding strength in his field, without prior historical situations remaining out it.» Finally it held that “this Court has declared that autonomy is not sovereignty [Constitutional Court judgment 247/2007, FJ 4 to)]. From this it is inferred that in the framework of the Constitution an Autonomous Community cannot unilaterally call a self-determination referendum to decide on its integration in Spain. This conclusion is of the same tenor that the one formulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in its statement of 20 August 1998, in which it rejected the adequacy of a unilateral project of secession by one of its provinces both in its Constitution and according to the postulates of International Law”.

On 12 February 2013 Decree 113/2013, of the Department of the Presidency of the Generalitat of Catalonia was approved, by which the “Advisory Council for National Transition” was created.

Between July 2013 and July 2014 (when Judgment 42/2014, of 25 March of the Constitutional Court had already been issued), the “Advisory Council for National Transition” drew up and delivered 18 reports to the Generalitat of Catalonia, that were brought together as the so-called White Paper of the National Transition of Catalonia. On 29 September 2014, the then president of the Generalitat of Catalonia, in an act that took place in its institutional headquarters, presented this complete report, in which various aspects that had to be taken into account for the process of transition of Catalonia to an independent country were analysed.

 The White Paper proclaimed the legitimacy of Catalonia’s process of self-determination, and contemplated various procedures for the creation of the new State, as a function of independence being able to be reached by means of a framework of collaboration negotiated with the Spanish Government, or if on the contrary, the State were to deploy instruments of opposition to independence.

 In both scenarios the key factor of the popular mobilisation was relied upon. In this regard, the White Paper literally stated that: «The support of a mobilised civil society might also prove to be a decisive factor for this objective. Should this pressure to negotiate fail, the alternative left to the Generalitat to implement the people’s will to create an independent State would be a unilateral declaration of independence». Besides this, the report also recognised that an effective unilateral declaration of independence would require State structures allowing the government of the territory to be effectively exercised. In the same way, in the process of independence it relied on “the support of a mobilised civil society”.

 This is what the White Paper said: “The unilateral declaration or proclamation of independence, in this context, entails the desire to immediately disconnect from the institutions and legal system of the Spanish State in such a way that the authority of those institutions and the ties with Spain are no longer recognised. From that moment on, the sole public authority in Catalonia would be the Generalitat, and the legal system applicable would only be the one that emanates from the will of its institutions (including the international law that is internally recognised). However, proclaiming this will does not necessarily mean that it is truly effective, even less so if it is done immediately and automatically. It is possible that at least for a time, there might be a conflict between the two systems such that the authorities and systems of each of them may vie to impose themselves and gain control. For this reason, the effectiveness of a unilateral declaration of independence is largely conditioned by the existence of state structures with the capacity to perform the governing functions over the territory and earn social acceptance of their performance.”

At the same time that the White Book for the National Transition of Catalonia was being presented by the president of the Generalitat of Catalonia, specifically on 26 September 2014, by virtue of the pre-existing political agreement, the Parliament approved the Catalan Law 10/2014, of popular polls other than referenda and other forms of citizen participation, and the Government of the Generalitat adopted the Decree of the Department of the Presidency of the Generalitat of Catalonia 129/2014, of 27 September, for the calling of a popular poll (not a referendum) on the political future of Catalonia.

 Both the Law of popular polls and the Decree calling the popular poll, were provisionally suspended two days after their adoption, through two rulings issued by the Constitutional Court on 29 September, and the order of suspension was communicated to the president of the Generalitat of Catalonia. In spite of this, six weeks afterwards, on 9 November 2014, a general poll was held in Catalonia.

The Constitutional Court, in its judgments 31/2015 and 32/2015, of 25 February, ultimately declared the unconstitutionality and nullity of the initially suspended laws.

On 24 February 2015, Decree 16/2015 of the Council of Government of the Generalitat of Catalonia, creating the “Commissioner for the National Transition” was published. It established that the Commissioner for the National Transition (who was attached to the Department of the Presidency) was to be responsible for "the functions inherent in the impulse, the coordination and the implementation of the measures for the culmination of the process of National Transition and overseeing the State structures, in accordance with the guidelines fixed by the Government and under the higher direction of the head of the department".

Some time later, the Government of the Generalitat of Catalonia website published an “Executive Plan for the Preparation of State structures”, and another designated “Plan of Strategic Infrastructures”, both included in what it identified as “10 Strategic Government Action Projects and for the National Transition”. These plans were consistent with the functions granted to the Government of the Generalitat in the Law of the Parliament of Catalonia 3/2015, of 11 March, on fiscal, financial and administrative measures (DOGC of 13 March 2015).

After both norms (Law 3/2015 and Decree 16/2015) had been provisionally suspended through two rulings of the Constitutional Court, as a result of a challenge by the Government of the Nation, CC Judgment 128/2016, of 7 July declared the unconstitutionality and consequent nullity of several clauses of Law 3/2015, as well as of Additional Provisions 22, 24 and 26. The rulings over the suspension of the efficacy of said Provisions were personally sent to the President of the Generalitat. Later, the May 10 CC judgment 52/2017 held unconstitutional and null Decree 16/2015 (already suspended), as well as - and this is how it described it - “the so-called "executive plan for the preparation of State structures" and "plan for strategic infrastructures", announced on the "govern.cat" website, through the web "Government of Catalonia (gencat.cat), inside the document "10 Strategic Government Action Projects and the National Transition 2015"»

The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court eventually reached a guilty verdict for the crime of contempt of court through judgment 972/2017, of 22 March 2017.

 2. From here on, we shall describe the actions and specific behaviour that are the object of indictment in this Special Case.

On 30 March 2015 a road map was signed by the political parties Convergència Democràtica de Catalunya (represented by defendant Josep Rull Andreu) and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (represented by Marta Rovira Vergés, declared in absentia in this Special Case), with the pro-independence organisations Ómnium Cultural (represented by the late Muriel Casals Couturier), Catalan National Assembly (represented by its then president Carme Forcadell Lluís) and the Association of Municipalities for Independence (represented by its vice-president José María Foige Rafel). This road map publicly expresses in writing the coordination of all the organisations to which the defendants belong who carried out the actions to be described below.

 In the road map it was established that, after the Autonomous elections held on 27 September 2015, if the pro-independence won a majority, a process of national transition would immediately start, and lead to the proclamation of the Catalan Republic within 18 months, by creating and setting in motion the necessary structures of the new State and with the preparation of a constitutional text proposal in the space of 10 months.

 On 12 April 2015 the ANC drew up and adopted its own road map in which it promised to ensure the fulfilment of the resolutions of the Parliament of Catalonia as regards the impulse of the process, with special attention “to the laws of disconnection, to the calling and holding of a binding referendum in the terms laid down, and to the immediate proclamation of independence should the Yes vote win”. Regarding Executive Power, it affirmed the need to work hand-in-hand with the Government to achieve maximum international support concerning the right of self-determination and the recognition of the new Catalan State. Also it specifically said that, should the Generalitat of Catalonia be «taken over politically and legally by the Spanish State and/or should a pro-independence party be outlawed», “the citizenry emerges as the political agent that pushes the process of independence forward”. That is to say, it adopted its role of, first of all, acting hand-in-hand with the Government of Catalonia and, secondly, if it became necessary, of mobilising the population as an element of pressure.

 In this same line, in the Enfocat document – confiscated at the home of Josep María Lladó, at the time Secretary General of the Vicepresidency of the Generalitat and right-hand man of Oriol Junqueras, by virtue of the search authorized, on 20-9-2017 by Court of Investigation No. 13 of Barcelona–, contains an exhaustive guide of the process to be developed. This document points out that the moment for independence would arrive “when there is a clear determination by citizens to give it support and to get involved actively and with international complicity; it has to begin in a conservative way gradually increasing the level of conflictiveness according to the State’s responses, under the leadership and with coordination of all the actors involved - and without a shadow of doubt - of actions and calendars”. Again, the clear expression of a prior agreement directed towards not respecting the legal paths referred to in the Constitutional Court judgment, relying on citizens’ mobilisation and collective action.

The documents referred to – the White Book, the road maps (the joint one and the ANC’s) and Enfocat – attest to the fact that the defendants adopted and accepted, not only the path of disconnection and the activation of a constituent process at the margins of the constitutional, statutory and legal framework, but also the need, if necessary, to disobey the mandates of the legitimate authorities, and the recourse to social pressure if necessary were the Spanish State to react through its institutions or powers.

The process that was deployed in reality coincided completely with what was forecast in such documents, so from the start the parliamentary, executive and social agreements that we have referred to were followed.

The actions that are here being tried begin in terms of the calendar with the holding of the autonomic election on 27 September 2015. In it, the electoral grouping Junts pel Sí, consisting of the political party Convergència Democràtica de Catalunya and the political party Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya, won a total of 39·59% of the votes and the CUP (Candidature of Popular Unity) won 8·21% of the votes. This is, in all, 47·80 % of the votes cast (29·56% of the total electoral census). With these results, they obtained a majority of MPs with 72 of a total of the 135 MPs that make up the Parliament of Catalonia: the electoral grouping Junts pel Sí obtained 62 MPs; and the CUP won 10 MPs.

Thus the pro-independence bloc won a majority of seats in the Parliament of Catalonia, although it did not reach the majority that the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia requires to propose modifications of the statutory framework. Specifically, the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia requires (arts. 222 and 223) a majority of 2/3 of the Parliament of Catalonia to approve a reform of the Statute of autonomy, this is, 90 MPs of 135.

 From this moment on, the purpose of the legislature centred on following the above-mentioned road map, for which the indispensable tool – together with the acts of the Parliament and of the Government of Catalonia, to which we shall refer – was the use of social mobilisation, channelled fundamentally through the organisations ANC and OC.

Evidence of this is the fact that in November 2015, the Parliament of Catalonia adopted Resolution I/XI of 9 November, with 9 points plus an annex: i) it ascertains that “a majority of seats [are] occupied by parliamentary forces whose object is that Catalonia should become an independent state” and “an ample pro-sovereignty majority of votes and seats in favour of beginning a non-subordinate constituent process”; ii) it “solemnly declares the start of the process to create an independent Catalan state in the form of a republic”; (iii) it “proclaims the start of a participative, open, integrating and active citizen’s constituent process to lay the foundation for the future Catalan Constitution; (iv) it urges the future Catalan government to adopt the necessary measures; (v) “within thirty days the passing of legislation on the constituent process, the Catalan social security system and the Catalan Tax Agency” will have to begin; (vi) “The Parliament of Catalonia, as the repository of sovereignty and the expression of the constituent power, reiterates that this House and the process of democratic disconnection from the Spanish State shall not be subject to the decisions of the institutions of the Spanish State, in particular the Constitutional Court, which it considers devoid of legitimacy and jurisdiction following its ruling of June 2010 on the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia previously voted on by the people in a referendum, among other rulings”; (vii) “The Parliament of Catalonia shall adopt the necessary measures to begin this process of disconnection from the Spanish state in a democratic, massive, sustained and peaceful way, in order to empower citizens at every level, and on the basis of open, active and integrating participation”; (viii) “The Parliament of Catalonia urges the future Catalan government to comply exclusively with those rules and mandates emanating from this legitimate and democratic House in order to safeguard fundamental rights which may be affected by decisions of the institutions of the Spanish state”; (ix) “The Parliament of Catalonia declares its will to begin negotiations with a view to giving effect to the democratic mandate to create an independent Catalan state in the form of a republic, and it agrees to make this known to the Spanish State, the European Union and the international community as a whole”.

We shall now distinguish between the acts determined to achieve the already described ends, realised: i) in the seat of the Parliament of Catalonia, ii) in the seat of the autonomous Government to implement the decisions taken in the previous chamber and iii) in the social field, in the street, summoning the social organisations and organised groups [and] the citizenry to the social mobilisation, in order to generate an environment of pressure on the State.

3. Legislative initiatives in the Parliament of Catalonia.

The Bureau of the Parliament had 7 members: Carme Forcadell i Lluis, as President, of the pro-sovereignty grouping Junts pel Sí (ERC); Lluis María Corominas i Díaz, as first deputy Speaker and member of Junts pel Sí (CDC), until he was replaced on 25/7/17 by Lluis Guinó Subiràs (CDC); Anna Simó i Castelló, first secretary, of the pro-sovereignty grouping Junts pel Sí (ERC); Joan Josep Nuet i Pujals, third secretary, of Catalunya Sí Que Es Pot (EUiA) and Ramona Barrufet i Santacana, fourth secretary, of the pro-sovereignty grouping Junts pel Sí (CDC). Besides them, Jose Mª Mirror (Ciudadanos), as second deputy Speaker, and David Pérez (PSC), as second secretary, were also members of the Bureau.

According to article 37.3 of the Regulation of the Parliament of Catalonia, the Bureau of the Parliament has among its functions, to qualify the texts and documents of a parliamentary nature, and to declare their admission or non-admission to be processed.

The defendants that were members of the Bureau ought not to have admitted to be processed and to have paralysed all the proposals contrary to the constitutional order, and in spite of the multiple warnings and personalised writs that the Constitutional Court issued them so that they would refrain from processing initiatives of this kind, voted systematically in favour of their admission, opening the possibility of their having broken the constitutional, statutory and legal norms, as well as the court orders that aimed to restore lawfulness.

The first initiative admitted to be processed allowed the adoption of Resolution 1/XI, of 9 November 2015, already quoted, of start of a process of creation of the independent Catalan State, indicating in his section sixth that the Parliament and the process of disconnection “not subordinated to the decisions of the institutions of the Spanish State, in particular of the Constitutional Court”. It was admitted to be processed by the Bureau with the favourable votes of Forcadell, Corominas, Simó, Barrufet and Nuet. It was challenged before the Constitutional Court and CC judgment CC judgment 259/15, of 2 December, declaring it unconstitutional.

The second initiative gave rise to the adoption of Resolution 5/XI, of 20 January 2016 for the creation of a “Commission of Study of the constituent process”. The commission was constituted on 28 January 2016 and reached the conclusion that the aim was to achieve disconnection from Spanish laws through the path of the unilaterality, that is to say, through illegal procedures. The Constitutional Court order 141/16, of 19 July, rejected the constitutionality of this activity of the commission and warned the members of the Bureau on their duty of not admitting similar initiatives.

However, in spite of the warning, the conclusions of the mentioned Commission were debated in the Parliament of Catalonia on 27 July 2016 and adopted by means of Resolution 263/XI, of 27 July 2016. The Constitutional Court order 170/2016, of 6 October, declared its nullity. Besides, it decided to personally notify its decision to the Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia, to the other members of the Bureau of the Parliament and to the general secretary of the Parliament, as well as to the president and other members of the Council of Government of the Generalitat of Catalonia, with the warning to abstain from carrying out any action aimed to comply with Resolution 263/XI, and to their duty to prevent or paralyse any initiative, juridical or material, that directly or indirectly might amount to ignoring or evading the nullity of said resolution, warning them of the possible offences, included criminal ones, they might commit in the event of non-compliance with the Court order.

The fourth initiative, admitted by the Bureau on 4 October 2016 with the favourable vote of the above-mentioned five defendants, contained the proposals to urge the Government of the Generalitat to hold a binding referendum on the independence of Catalonia and to engage in a constituent process if this option got the most votes. It gave rise to the Resolution 306/XI, of 4 October, where went back to proclaim – against the decisions of the Constitutional Court – the right of self-determination of Catalonia, urging to the Government to initiate the democratic poll and to contribute for this all the necessary resources. The Constitutional Court order 24/2017, of 14 February, declared the nullity of the Resolution. It also decided to notify the resolution personally to the Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia, the other members of the Bureau of the Parliament and the Secretary General of the Parliament, as well as to the President and other members of the Council of Government of the Generalitat of Catalonia, with the warning to abstain for carrying out any action aimed at giving fulfilment to the cancelled sections of Resolution 306/XI and their duty to prevent or paralyse any initiative, juridical or material, that directly or indirectly might amount to ignoring or evading the nullity of said resolution, warning them of the possible offences, included criminal ones, they might commit in the event of non-compliance with the Court order. Finally, it passed evidence to the Public prosecutor.

The fifth initiative admitted to be processed was the Budget Law, Law 4/17, of 28 March, that contained an Additional Provision, No. 40, that earmarked a budgetary section for the holding of the 1 October referendum decided by the above-mentioned Resolution 306/XI. The five defendants once again voted in favour of its admission to be processed in spite of the repeated warnings of illegality and of criminal responsibility.

But the most notable initiatives as regards their content were the proposals of the Self-determination Referendum Law –which proclaimed the people of Catalonia as a sovereign political subject and established the hierarchical supremacy of this Law over any other norm that might conflict with it, summoning the citizenry to the poll - and the Law of Legal Transition and the Foundation of the Republic – through which, in the event of a referendum result favourable to independence, the independent republic of Catalonia was to be constituted –. After their passage, they ended up as Law 19/2017, of 6 September, of the self-determination referendum, published in the Official Journal of the Generalitat of Catalonia on 6 September 2017, and Law 20/2017, of 8 September, on Legal Transition and the Foundation of the Republic, published on 8 September 2017. Both the agreements of the Bureau of admission to be processed and the decisions of the Plenary were declared to be invalid by several resolutions of the CC of 19 September 2017, and testimony was sent by the Constitutional Court to the public prosecutor.

 The Referendum Law laid down the automatic declaration of independence and the creation of the Republic of Catalonia if the Yes vote won in the referendum. The Law of Legal Transition and the Foundation of the Republic was a kind of norm of transition to the new State, in which the territory, Catalan nationality, the succession of legal frameworks and public authorities, the rights and duties of the citizens, the system of institutions of government, the court system, finances and the constituent process were regulated.

The Referendum Bill was presented as a bill proposition on 6 September 2017 by MPs Marta Rovira (spokesperson of Junts pel Sí) and Anna Gabriel (spokesperson of the CUP).

The Legal Transition and the Foundation of the Republic Bill was presented as a bill proposition on 7 September 2017 by defendants Lluis Corominas (chair of the Parliamentary group Junts pel Sí), Mireia Boya (chair of the Parliamentary group of the CUP), Marta Rovira (spokesperson of Junts pel Sí) and by 3 other CUP MPs.

 In spite of the reports by the senior lawyer of the Parliament and its general secretary, that expressed that the admission to be processed of both Bills was contrary to the Constitutional Court’s prohibitional rulings mentioned above, and disobeyed the deliberately issued requirements to the Bureau of the Parliament to prevent or paralyse any initiative that aimed to ignore or evade the nullity of the parliamentary resolutions that these new Bills developed, the Bureau of the Parliament of Catalonia included these Bills on the respective agenda, and processed the legislative initiative.

The Bureau of the Parliament admitted them to be processed by the procedure of urgency and turned down the request for reconsideration of both Bills, with the favourable vote of defendant Carme Forcadell, Lluis Guinó, Ana Simó, Ramona Barrufet and Josep Joan Nuet with regard to the referendum bill, and that of the first four defendants with regard to the Legal transition Bill, while defendant Nuet abstained on this occasion.

 The Council of Statutory Guarantees of Catalonia, an institution of the Generalitat that ensures that its provisions fit in the Statute and the Constitution (articles 38 and 76 of the Statute of Catalonia and Law 2/2009), adopted two Plenary decisions on 6 and 7 September 2017. In them it decided I) to inform the Parliament of the compulsory nature, in the terms of legislative procedure, of the opening subsequent to the publication of any bill of a period for the request for a report from this Council, to guarantee the right of MPs in the exercise of their function. And that it was up to the Bureau to send to the Council such requests for a report; and II) all the Bills, without exception, in the phase of their passage through the Parliament of Catalonia and before being finally adopted, need to be open to requests for a report from this Council, given its compulsory nature, if so requested by legitimated subjects.

The Plenary of the Parliament, after part of the MPs present left the session after a debate in which they expressed the illegality of the proposed decisions, approved both Bills as Laws 19/2017, of 6 September, of the Self-determination Referendum (DOGC, 6 September 2017), and 20/2017, of 8 September, of Legal Transition and the Foundation of the Republic (DOGC, 8 September 2017).

Both the decisions of the Bureau of admission to be processed and the decisions of the Plenary, that included the debate and voting on both bills in the agenda of the sessions of September 6th and 7th, suppressing the essential formalities of the legislative procedure, were declared to be invalid by rulings 123/2017 and 124/2017 of the CC on 19 September 2017. Both ruñling declared their immediate effectiveness as soon as they were published – that took place in the BOE no. 229, of 22 September 2017-, and it was decided to pass evidence to the public prosecutor against the Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia, Sra. Carme Forcadell i Lluís, the first Vice-president of the Bureau of the Parliament, Sr. Lluís Guinó i Subirós, the first Secretary of the Bureau, Sra. Anna Simó i Castelló, the third Secretary of the Bureau, Sr. Joan Josep Nuet i Pujals, and the fourth Secretary of the Bureau, Sra. Ramona Barrufet i Santacana, for breaking the mandate of the para 1 of article 87.1 LOTC, in relation to the deeds that are the object of the incident of execution, when allowing their admission to be processed.

Both laws were challenged by the Government of the State and suspended by the Constitutional Court by means of resolutions dated of 7 September 2017. The Law 19/2017, published in the BOE of 8/9/2017, went finally declared to be invalid by CC judgment 114/2017, of 17 October, and equally declared the nullity of the Law 20/2017 by CC judgment 124/2017, of 8 November. All the resolutions of the Constitutional Court contained once again the relevant warnings on the illegality of future decisions and the possibility of criminal responsibilities. The suspension orders with these warnings were notified personally to the members of the Bureau and the Government, and other authorities (in this case, the members of the electoral board).

The following initiative was reflected in Resolution 807/XI, of 7 September 2017, by which the members of the Electoral Board were appointed. This Resolution was suspended by a Constitutional Court writ of the same date –and notified personally to the members of the Government, of the Bureau and of the electoral board–, in which coercive fines were imposed on those appointed. Later, CC judgment of 31 October 2017 declared the referred Resolution to be invalid. The European Court of Human Rights of Strasbourg has not admitted complaint No. 70219/17 placed by one of the people on which the coercive fines was imposed for belonging to this electoral administration, in Aumatell i Arnau vs Spain Decision of 11 September 2018.

Finally, the presentation of the results of the illegal referendum was requested on 4 October 2017, and this act was suspended by the Constitutional Court order of 5 October 2017. The Bureau met on the same day. The Senior Lawyer and the Secretary General warned in writing that this amounted to applying norms that had been suspended by the CC. The Bureau decided, with the favourable vote of its members Forcadell, Guinó, Simó and Barrufet, to admit to be processed the application and later to refuse the application of reconsideration. By Constitutional Court order of 5/10/2017 the appeal for protection was admitted in the face of these decisions, and their effectiveness was suspended as a precautionary measure. The order was notified to the members of the Bureau, and warned them again of their duty to prevent or paralyse any initiative that amounted to evading the suspension.

On 6 October, the Government of the Generalitat, through a letter signed by the vice-president of the Government of the Generalitat Oriol Junqueras, his spokesperson Jordi Turull and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Raül Romeva communicated to the autonomic Parliament the result of the referendum, affirming that the Yes vote had won with 90·18% of the votes cast.

On 10 October 2017 the president of the Generalitat appeared before the plenary of the Parliament and declared that, observing the sovereign will of the people of Catalonia, independence as a State in the form of a republic had to be declared, and he immediately proposed the suspension of the effects of this declaration in order to negotiate with the Spanish State. The MPs of the pro-independence parties signed a declaration outside the Parliament recognising the effects of said declaration of independence in accordance with Law 20/2017, which laid down the coming into force of the Law of Legal Transition and the Foundation and the start of the constituent process, the will to start negotiations with Spain on the basis of equality as well as the need to communicate to international organisations and the European Union the birth of the new State, urged the Government of Catalonia to give full effectiveness to the previous statements and made a call to the citizenry to carry out the actions to culminate this collective aspiration.

On 27 October (in spite of the fact that CC judgment 114/2017, of 17 October, BOE of 24 October, declaring invalid the Law 19/2017 of the Referendum, had been delivered), defendant Lluis Corominas (president of Junts pel Sí, and member of the Bureau of the Parliament until 25 July 2017) and Mireia Boya (chair of the Parliamentary group of the CUP), together with MPs Marta Rovira and Anna Gabriel (spokespersons of the parliamentary groups of Junts pel Sí and CUP respectively) presented to the Bureau of the Parliament two draft resolutions to be voted in the Plenary: the first had as its object the declaration of independence of Catalonia with an identical content to the declaration made by the pro-independence MPS outside the Parliament to which reference has been made, and the second had the start of a constituent process for the new republic with the creation of an advisory council and the culmination by means of the calling of a referendum in which the text of the Constitution of Catalonia would be put to the vote.

 The proposals were processed thanks to the same supports in the Bureau as those that have been referred to on the previous occasion (Nuet voted against, and the remaining defendants voted in favour), and were later voted by 82 of the 135 members of the Parliament. The other members of parliament abandoned the Chamber to express the illegality of the proposals.

The vote took place on request of the member of parliament Roger Torrent Ramió (current Speaker of the Parliament), in a ballot box and with the maintenance of the secrecy of the vote for the participating MPs.

The declaration of independence was adopted with 70 votes in favour, 10 against and 2 abstentions – out of a total of 135 autonomic MPs - and did not manage to have any practical concretion since, as will later be said, on the same day, 27 October, the Plenary of the Senate adopted a decision approving the necessary measures to guarantee the fulfilment of the constitutional obligations and for the protection of the general interest on the part of the Generalitat of Catalonia (BOE of 27 October 2017), and laying down the immediate sacking of all the members of the Government of the Generalitat, the dissolution of the autonomous Legislative Chamber and the calling of autonomous elections to form a new Parliament.

4. The actions of the Government of the Generalitat.

 The members of the autonomous Government to which this indictment document refers had the role of taking the necessary executive decisions to ensure the realisation of the referendum.

Prior to this, in a series of meetings held in 2015 and 2016 – always of a reserved nature – in which members of the Government of the Generalitat, officials of the autonomous Administration and some notable personalities related with the pro-independence world participated, it had been decided to hold a self-determination referendum in Catalonia, whether or not it was authorised by the State, which article 149.1.32 of the Spanish Constitution grant exclusive powers to authorise.

The most important milestones of this process – of which were the defendants were protagonists – of the calling of an illegal poll and the subsequent declaration of independence, will now be narrated.

In parallel with the activity of the Parliament described above, on 9 June 2017 the president and the vice-president of the Generalitat, after a meeting with all the Council of Government, presented the question that was going to be asked in the self-determination referendum, in the orange-tree patio of the Palau of the Generalitat, and established 1 October as the date when it would be held. They were accompanied by all the members of the Government, by the Speaker of the Parliament, the members of the already quoted Bureau and several members of parliament of Junts pel Sí and of the CUP.

In mid-July 2017 Sr. Jordi Jané was replaced by defendant Joaquim Forn Chiariello as head of the Department of Interior, thus ensuring at the top of the Department – in which the autonomous police corps is integrated – a person who would back the holding of the referendum. Immediately afterwards the then Director General of Police of the Generalitat, Albert Batlle, also resigned. For the same reason and in the same period, the Ministers of Education, Meritxell Ruiz Isern, and of the Presidency, Neus Munté Fernández, were sacked, and their posts were taken by Clara Ponsatí and the defendant Jordi Turull. Also at this moment the Minister of Industry Jordi Baiget was sacked, as a result of having said in an interview that he considered the holding of a unilateral referendum to be irresponsible.

In this same month of July 2017 the Government of the Generalitat adopted Decrees 108/17, of 17 July and 110/17, of 18 July by which the responsibilities of the various Departments were restructured, so that the administration of electoral processes came to entirely depend on the Vicepresidency of the Generalitat, whose head was Oriol Junqueras.

On 6 September 2017, after the adoption by the Parliament of Catalonia of Law 19/2017, of the self-determination referendum, all the members of the Government of the Generalitat (President, Vice-president and 12 ministers), signed Decree 139/2017, calling the referendum. The Plenary of the Constitutional Court, by an order dated 7 September 2017, suspended its application – with the relevant personal warnings with a view to prevent non-compliance and on the possible criminal responsibilities – and by means of Constitutional court judgment 122/2017, of 31 October 2017, the unconstitutionality and nullity of the quoted norm was declared.

On the same 6 September 2017, at the proposal of the Department of the Vicepresidency and of Economy and Inland revenue of the Generalitat of Catalonia, the autonomous Government approved Decree 140/2017, of 6 September, of complementary norms for the carrying out of the self-determination referendum of Catalonia, containing previsions on electoral administration - through the boards -, the preparation of the census, the appointment of representatives and controllers of the polling stations, the institutional and electoral campaign with the use of public spaces and media, procedure for face-to-face voting and voting abroad, ballot boxes, electoral documentation, the count, personnel cooperating with the electoral administration, international observers, and workplace administration or effects of the participants. The Decree was signed by the president of the Generalitat, as well as the vice-president of the Government and Minister of Economy and Inland revenue, defendant Oriol Junqueras Vies. The Plenary of the Constitutional Court, by a writ dated 7 September 2017, suspended its application – with the warnings pointed out, and notifying it personally to the members of the autonomic Government and to numerous authorities– and it later issued CC judgment 121/2017, of 31 October 2017, declaring it to be unconstitutional and null.

The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Catalonia, as Preliminary Investigation 3/2017, was processing the various complaints filed by the Public prosecutors against the members of the Government of the Generalitat, by the assumed non-compliance with the Constitutional Court writs referred to above, especially regarding the warnings to the members of the Government to abstain from carrying out any act to allow the preparation or holding of the planned referendum on 1 October. In this investigation the following resolution was adopted on 27 September 2017:

 «I order the Mossos d'Esquadra, the Civil Guard and the National Police the following :

.- To prevent, until 1 October, the use of public premises or buildings - or of those in which any kind of public service is rendered - for the preparation of the holding of the referendum.

On that date, to prevent their opening, proceeding, if need be, to the closure of any that may have managed to open.

Should the acts of preparation of the referendum or those of the voting on 1 October take place in buildings with installations shared with public services in operation on this day or on previous days, only those premises in which the acts to preparation take place, or where the vote is take place on the 1st are to be closed, taking care not to affect the other premises in which their own services need to continue to be rendered.

 .- To confiscate all material related to the referendum that may be ready to be taken into, or found inside, these premises or buildings, including the computers that constitute the object or instrument of the offences being investigated.< /br>< /br> .- Similarly, they will prevent the activity and/or opening of public establishments that are used as logistical infrastructure and/or of calculation: centres for processing, reception, counting or handling of votes.

Mossos d'Esquadra, Civil Guard and National Police will have to act jointly for the effectiveness of this order, loaning each other at all times the help and support necessary to make possible the strict compliance with what is laid down here, and with observance of what is stated in article 46.2 of the Organic Law of Security Forces and Corps and in article 2.3.a of Decree 770/2017 of 28 July. "The relevant documents are tobe delivered to the respective domains of Mossos d'Esquadra, Civil Guard and National Police”.

At the behest of the presidency of the Generalitat, on 27 September the Security Board of the Autonomous Community met to tackle the holding of the referendum, without any agreement being reached in view of the opposing positions of the representatives of the State and of the Generalitat. The quoted meeting was attended, in representation of the central Government, by the Secretary of State for Security, the Delegate of the [Spanish] Government in the Autonomous Community, the Technical Secretary General for the Interior Ministry and the Director of the Coordination Cabinet of the Secretariat of State, amongst others.

On 28 September 2017, the top officers of the Mossos d'Esquadra police Corps met with the president of the Generalitat of Catalonia, his vice-president the defendant Oriol Junqueras and the [Catalan] Interior Minister Joaquim Forn. At this meeting they pointed out the problem of citizen security that could be posed on 1 October, because of the large quantity of mobilised collectives on those dates (including 42 Committees of Defence of the Referendum, students, firemen, farmers, etcetera and possible organisations opposed to the act), and they proposed the suspension of the vote on 1 October. In spite of this and knowing the instructions contained in the resolution of 27 September 2017 of the High Court of Catalonia and of the resolutions of the Constitutional Court that we have been quoting, they were told of the decision to go ahead with the referendum. Thus, in the Report of the General Commissariat of Information, issued in Sabadell on 28 September 2017 it was stated that “on 1 October 2017 the self-determination referendum of Catalonia is to be held”. And sure enough, as is notorious, on 1 October the poll was held, despite the ban issued by the High Court of Catalonia.

 5. The performance of the civil associations pro-independence and of organised groups. 

The social mobilisation as half for the achievement of the relative ends to the non-compliance with the lawfulness and the disobedience to the administrative and court orders. Mainly, the events of the 20 and 21 September and 1 October 2017. Acts against legitimate court decisions and against the performance of the authorities or public civil servants that aimed to give fulfilment to these court resolutions.

It has already been said that on 30 March 2015, the pro-independence political parties expanded the concert of performance to other pro-independence groupings with the signature of the so-called road map by the representatives of Omnium Cultural, the Catalan National Assembly and the Association of Municipalities for Independence. It has also been stated that on 12 April 2015, the Catalan National Assembly drew up a document fixing its specific action plan for 2015–2018, fixing as its aims the coordination with the autonomic Government in the achievement of the ends already referred to and taking charge of social mobilisation, as it considered that, in the face of the reaction of the Spanish State, the citizenry had to show itself to be the political agent to promote the independence process.

 The calls designed to favour the social support for the independence process became an indispensable tool to reach the aims fixed.

As early as the Diada of 11 September 2015, with the slogan "Via lliure a la República Catalana" (Open Road to the Catalan Republic), defendant Jordi Sánchez, in the presence of defendant Jordi Cuixart and of other pro-independence political leaders and in front of a crowd of hundreds of thousands of citizens, said: “We have decided to leave. And we will do so as fast as we can, with the legitimacy of the street and the mandate of the ballot boxes” (police report, 15/12/17 folio 83).

In the 2016 Diada, under the slogan “A punt”, [Ready] in front of nearly 400,000 demonstrators that the organisers situated in Barcelona, defendant Jordi Sánchez demanded determination for the ballot boxes to be placed in 2017 and, beside defendant Jordi Cuixart, called for pro-independence unity and encouraged to the Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia to display disobedience if the Constitutional Court sanctioned her for allowing the parliamentary vote that opened the door to the calling of the unilateral referendum (police report, 15/12/17 folio 83 and Annex 3 of the expanded police report dated 1/2/2018).

In another demonstration organised by the ANC on 13 November of the same year, in the presence of the main pro-independence political leaders, defendant Jordi Sánchez affirmed that Catalonia would not remain indifferent in the face of arrest warrants or the trials of its elected officials, and added that the moment of truth was approaching and that permanent mobilisation was beginning.

 On the occasion of the trial held in the High Court of Catalonia for the holding of the referendum [sic] of 9 November 2014, the three pro-independence organisations - ANC, Ómnium and AMI - announced mobilisations against the trials that were to begin on 6 February 2017. In these calls it was said that the citizens had the chance to show that they were willing to make personal sacrifices to stand on the side of the President and the other defendants, and that the festive demonstrations were over. And developing these initiatives, the ANC called a demonstration 6 February, in which it asked Spanish Justice to abandon its jurisdiction over Catalonia.

 On 11 June 2017 a new multitudinous concentration took place, in which a manifesto was read exhorting the participation and the mobilisation of all the supporters of independence. Defendant Jordi Cuixart assured that the pro-independence organisations constituted themselves as guarantors that the referendum that was to be held would be binding, because it would have consequences the day after its holding. Jordi Sánchez spoke to the Government of Spain, declaring that the only way to prevent the referendum would be to use improper methods, as the will of the people was to go ahead and not move backwards.

On the Diada of 11 September 2017, that took place immediately after Law 19/2017, of the Referendum, was adopted by the Catalan Parliament and suspended by the Constitutional Court, they organised a mobilisation under the slogan "Referendum is democracy", in which the president of the Generalitat, most of the Ministers of the Government and the Speaker of the Parliament Carme Forcadell took part. In the public speeches, Jordi Sánchez spoke to those gathered to claim that the street had been won again, to thank the politicians for not failing them as regards the Law of the Referendum and the Law of Disconnection, and to proclaim that they only owed obedience to the Catalan Government.

In this strategy of mobilisation, on 20 September 2017, defendants Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart summoned, through their own Twitter accounts and those of the organisations they led, the population to gather in front of the headquarters of the Department of the Vicepresidency, Economy and Treasury of the Generalitat of Catalonia, at 19-21 of Rambla de Catalunya in Barcelona. The reason was that the agents of the Court Police Group of the Civil Guard of Barcelona, by order of the Court of Investigation No. 13 of this city, had made a number of arrests and had initiated the implementation of the court decision to search the installations of the Department with a view to find elements and data that would allow them to find those responsible for the announcement of the planned 1 October referendum and to prevent it being held.

ANC and Omnium, through the website www.cridademocracia.cat -specifically in subpage www.cridademocracia.cat/whatsapp/ - offered the option fo joining groups of WhatsApp from which people were invited to the mobilisation and to be connected permanently to receive alerts and to be organised in case of need. In actual fact, on 20 September, Omnium Cultural, via WhatApp, at 8.55 a.m. called concentrations not only before the headquarters of Vicepresidency, Economy and Treasury, but also at the Departments of Foreign Affairs, of Welfare and Family, and of Governance, with the result that we are going to explain.

The announcements not only made public that an act of the Civil Guard aiming to prevent the referendum was taking place, but also spread the place where the court search was being undertaken, called on the citizenry to defend the Catalan institutions, demanded that the Civil Guard free the people that had been detained, and asked the Catalans to mobilise, saying that they would not be able to cope with everyone or that the forces of law and order had made a mistake and had declared war on those who wanted to vote.

The agents of the Civil Guard belonging to the Court Commission arrived at the Department at 8 a.m. on 20 September 2017, and parked their vehicles outside the doors. In the following minutes the number of people went increasing until the point that at 10.30 a.m. the demonstrators had completely surrounded the building, preventing the court commission from carrying out its functions as usual.

 Under the sole protection of the two Mossos d'Esquadra that take care every day of the ordinary surveillance at the entrance to the building, who did not receive any reinforcements during the day, except for the arrival of some mediation agents, in spite of having requested the presence of skilled Units as many as five times, the events developed with the presence of up to 60,000 demonstrators at some moments, that were crushed together until they pushed, and almost demolished, the entrance door of the building in an irritated and hostile environment.

The security perimeter that the court commission called for was not set up, so that to walk through the thousands of demonstrators gathered there there was no other access than a narrow human corridor that only allowed passage in single file, and that was a cordon not controlled by the police but formed by volunteers of the summoning organisation (the Catalan National Assembly), that wore waistcoats to identify them as belonging to this organisation. The summoning organisations set up a stage and distributed water and sandwiches among those present.

The mobilisation prevented the Civil Guard from taking the arrested persons (who had to be present during the police search as laid down in the procedural laws) into the building, and from carrying out the court order with normality. The vehicles of the Civil Guard, three Nissan Patrols with official signs and registration numbers PGC-5313-N, PGC-2446-N and PGC 5314-C, and four camouflaged vehicles - Renault Megane PGC-8401-C, Ford Focus PGC-8019-C, Laguna Renault PGC-6504-B and Hyundai I20 PGC-8784-C – ended up with important damage, both inside and outside.

Only at 12 midnight did it prove possible to prepare an exit so that the Lawyer of the Administration of Justice of Investigating Court No. 13 could leave the place safely, by infiltrating her among theatre-goers as they left the theatre situated in the adjoining building, which she had to access across the roof terraces of the buildings. The other Civil Guard agents managed to leave once the demonstration had been dissolved, doing so specifically in two turns, one at 4 a.m. on 21 September, and the other at 7 a.m. on the same day.

During the riots [“disturbios”], the defendant Jordi Sánchez emerged as the interlocutor of the mobilisation before the serving police agents and imposed conditions for the effective development of their task, denying to the agents of the Civil Guard that they could bring the arrested persons into the building, unless that the agents of the court commission accepted to accompany them on foot through the tumult [sic] and equally refusing to let the agents of the Civil Guard take charge of the police vehicles, unless they approached them on foot, without any guarantee of indemnity, up to the place where they were parked, crossing the mass of people that surrounded them.

From the arrival to the place of defendant Jordi Cuixart, both spoke on several occasions to the crowd to run their performance. In the afternoon of the 20th, Cuixart addressed those assembled and demanded the release of all the arrested persons and challenged the State to come to confiscate the material that had prepared for the referendum and that had hidden in particular venues.

After this intervention, defendant Jordi Sánchez took the word, and thanked those present for having had trusted the pro-independence organisations. He remembered that these organisations had promised to take to the streets to defend the institutions when need be, and that they were there. He proclaimed that that was the day and that the moment had come to take to the street to defend the dignity, the institutions and the referendum, so that neither Rajoy nor the Constitutional Court, nor all the Security corps of the State could stop them. And he asserted that had had met a short while before with Carles Puigdemont and that the president had assured him that the referendum would be held. He finished asking people not to leave for home yet, as they had a “long and intense night”, and that they had to work because they were the dream of a new country.

At about 11.41 p.m. both defendants Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart, standing on one of the Civil Guards’ official cars, spoke once again to those present: Cuixart said he was speaking for the pro-independence organisations, as well as for the PDECat, ERC and the CUP-CC, and proclaiming that “they were all uprisen” to struggle for their freedom and saying that from this altar (in a clear reference to the police vehicle) Jordi Sánchez and he wanted to summon all those present to a permanent mobilisation in defence of the arrested persons, calling them to a concentration that was to take place at 12.00 a.m. the following day, at the High Court of Catalonia; for his part, Jordi Sánchez addressed the crowd once again to say that neither the Constitutional Court nor Rajoy nor the Civil Guard or anybody would manage to prevent it and, after asking those present to leave the mobilisation of this day, asked them to attend the demonstration on the following day in front of the High Court.

These acts were induced, summoned, directed and wanted by defendant Sánchez and Cuixart, who kept up the call until midnight – the time of its ending that had been communicated previously –, and who then called for a permanent demonstration and to be present to demand the freedom of the arrested persons the next day in front of the High Court of Catalonia.

Likewise, these acts were known, agreed to and wanted by the remaining defendants, some of whom during the day turned up at the place, such as Oriol Junqueras or Carme Forcadell, who at no point called for a disbanding or for the restoration of public order.

Similar facts aimed to prevent the normal operation of the Administration of Justice took place on occasion of other searches and decided arrests by the Investigating Court number 13 quoted.

So, during the search of the home of José María Jové some 400 people gathered to prevent the departure of the police vehicle for some 15 minutes. In the search of the headquarters of the Department of Foreign Affairs, in Via Layetana 14, the congregation of 200 people in a hostile attitude gave rise to Civil Guards taking the Lawyer of the Administration of Justice out of the place in a camouflaged car. When the arrested person Xavier Puig Farré was taken out of the building the people gathered there tried to grab him away from the control of the agents and the official vehicle was rocked and thumped. In the search of the warehouses at numbers 17, 18 and 19 of the Can Barris Urbanisation, carrer S, in Bigues i Riells (Barcelona), the hostile attitude of a group of 200/250 people concentrated outside made the Lawyer of the Administration of Justice have to leave the place in a camouflaged vehicle and eight vans with the confiscated material suffered some damage. Similarly, there were incidents during searches carried out in Berga and at the barracks of the Civil Guard in Manresa and of Reus.

Defendants Junqueras, Turull, Rull, Romeva, Bassa, Forn, Forcadell, Sánchez and Cuixart expressed through the social media messages of solidarity, affection and commitment and expressions of gratitude, encouraging active participation in the referendum declared illegal, and stimulating the massive presence of citizens at the ballot boxes in spite of knowing that the Security forces of the State had received the court order from the High Court of Catalonia to prevent it from being held.

Thus, Oriol Junqueras, on 27 September 2017 spoke to the students telling them that they were indispensable for the implementation of the Republic, and adding that “it was a matter of democracy, civil and social rights” and that the country felt proud of them all; Raül Romeva, from Diplocat, invited 33 MPs from 17 countries to do an international monitoring of the illegal act; Carme Forcadell received that delegation in the autonomic Parliament and declared that “the Mossos d'Esquadra did not accept the control by the State that the Public prosecutors have ordered”; Joaquim Forn said that “in the face of the fear-mongering discourse of the Spanish government, we say: we shall vote on 1-O”; and added on 27 September 2017 that “the Police and the Civil Guard came to Catalonia to upset order and that all these sendoffs of policemen from places in Spain as if they were going to war did not go with them”; Josep Rull on 21 September 2017 said that a ship for the lodging of members of the National Police had been prevented from anchoring in Palamós bay; Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart, on 22 September 2017, in several audiovisual media and texts called for permanent mobilisation; Jordi Turull communicated that “the 1-O is in the hands of the people” and that “on 1-O independence is at stake”; Jordi Cuixart, on 27 September 2017, declared that “if the Yes won, the republic would have to be proclaimed” and on 29 September 2017, he added “Long live the Catalan democratic revolution, get mobilised to defend the referendum, as from this afternoon let’s all go to the schools”, initiating the designated day of Escoles Obertes; on 29 September 2017, Dolors Bassa withdrew powers over the polling stations from the civil servants of Education and Labour, of whose departments she was the head, to ensure the availability of the centres.

On 21 September 2017 some 20,000 people gathered before the building of the High Court of Catalonia, summoned by Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart in protest at the court decisions adopted to prevent the holding of the referendum that had been declared illegal by the Constitutional Court, and defendant Carme Forcadell spoke to them in an address demanding the freedom of the arrested persons.

At the barracks of the Civil Guard in Travesera de Gracia, the place where the arrested persons were in custody, 300 people gathered and managed to cut the traffic.

On the same day there were hostile demonstrations in front of the Civil Guard and National Police barracks in Manresa, and the barracks of Sant Andreu de la Barca were surrounded.

At the City of Justice, when the arrested persons were put at the disposal of the court, some 2.000 people gathered, among whom were the defendants Forcadell, Romeva, Junqueras and the fugitives Comín and Rovira.

On 22 September 2017 there were concentrations in front of the Civil Guard of Carnovelles, Vilanova and Ripoll barracks, and the ID-card offices of the National Police in Barcelona were plastered with stickers.

As regards the vote on 1 October the defendants Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart encouraged the citizens, through Twitter messages and the media, to occupy the polling stations before the time the autonomic police force was ordered to intervene, and exhorted them to prevent the police agents from closing them and withdrawing the electoral material. They also encouraged them to go massively to vote – in spite of the expresses and clear prohibition of the Constitutional Court and of the High Court of Catalonia – and to protect the vote count afterwards of the votes in the face of the possible actions of the State Security forces and corps.

After the incidents against public order to which we have referred, that occurred on the occasion of the various court searches, the call through the media to go to vote on 1 October, made by the members of the afore-mentioned Government, and by Sánchez, Cuixart and Carme Forcadell, was logically carried out in the full awareness of the illegality of the act and that this could lead to altercations, tumults and riots [disturbios].

On 4 September 2017, for example, Marta Rovira – procedurally in absentia – wrote “If the State attacks in a direct way the essential elements of the referendum, such as the ballot boxes, the schools or the electoral coordinators, we shall have to react, we shall mobilise the citizens so that this does not happen… and polling stations can open with normality”. Comín – in the same procedural situation – affirmed in the newspaper ARA that “The State will have to repress the 1-O and the people will not stay at home”. Cuixart, on 27 September 2017, said to El País: “If what we are accused of is sedition for calling for a permanent mobilisation, Mr. public prosecutor, they’re right, permanent mobilisation, everyone out in the street”.

As a consequence of this call to the citizenry, it turned out that prior to 6 a.m. on 1 October – and in a lot of cases, before that, during the whole weekend –, a large number of organised people, summoned to this end by the defendants, occupied the polling stations, and locked themselves inside with the purpose of offering resistance to the police action that had been decided in a court order.

In Preliminary Investigation 3/2017 being made before the High Court of Catalonia, an order was issued on 27 September 2017 by which the Investigating judge of the case ordered to all the Security Forces and Corps (of the State and autonomic) to prevent the opening of the polling stations, to confiscate the electoral material and to prevent the holding of the referendum in the above-mentioned terms.

To this end, numerous members of the National Police and of the Civil Guard, roughly 6.000 agents, were deployed to Catalonia to reinforce the fulfilment of the court order and avoid the breaking of legality.

In these circumstances, the defendants decided to continue with the strategy of breaking the court mandate, breaking legality, and holding the poll, despite it being easy to imagine that the day would not end without disturbances and clashes.

As predicted, during the day there were indeed acts of resistance and disobedience to the legitimate mandates of the Public Force, and numerous situations of tension, riots [disturbios] and clashes.

On 3 October the autonomic Government carried out several acts of support of the general strike summoned by Taula per la Democracia, with the support of the organisations ANC and OC. Specifically, the defendant Dolors Bassa issued an Order on 29 September 2017, Article 4 of which laid down that the “parties have to give publicity to the strike so that the citizenship can know of it” and later by means of a document of the Department of Labour she said that “the Government adheres”. On this strike day 116 roads and rail tracks were cut, it is needs to be underlined that of these, 100 people cut the AP7 [motorway] in both directions, and that 400 people cut the AP7 south of Barcelona, with the consequent traffic chaos.

On 8 November another general strike has held, summoned by Intersindical-CSC (to be specific, by Carlos Sastre) and seconded by ANC and OC. During it there were 77 cases of wheeled communication routes being cut, including the AP-7 and the A-2.

 6. In view of the grave breach of legality that had occurred, on 11 October 2017 the Prime Minister of Spain sent a demand to the autonomic president for him to comply with his constitutional duties. On 19 October the president of the Generalitat informed the Prime Minister that the Parliament of Catalonia would proceed to vote the declaration of independence. The situation motivated the calling of an extraordinary meeting of the Council of Ministers that, on 21 October, activated the mechanism of application of Article 155 of the Constitution and proposed to the Spanish Senate the adoption of a set of measures to restore constitutional legality. On 27 October, as has already been said, the Catalan Parliament, following the road map previously laid down, declared the independence of Catalonia and its constitution as a new State in the form of a republic. The Plenary of the Spanish Senate, ascertaining «the extraordinary gravity in the non-compliance of the constitutional obligations and the realisation of acts that are gravely contrary to the general interest on the part of the Institutions of the Generalitat of Catalonia», issued a Decision on the same day, 27 October 2017, approving the necessary measures to guarantee the fulfilment of constitutional obligations and for the protection of the general interest by the Generalitat of Catalonia (BOE of 27 October 2017), and this entailed the immediate sacking of all the members of the Government of the Generalitat of Catalonia, the dissolution of the autonomic Legislative Chamber and the calling of an autonomic election to form a new Parliament.

B) The provision by the Government of the Generalitat of public funds for the organisation and holding of the illegal referendum. The crime of misuse of public funds

The facts that have just been described gave rise to the establishment of pecuniary obligations against the public assets that the Catalan Public Treasury constitutes, some of which were the object of payment and others not, remaining as debts of this patrimony – or rights of credit, from another perspective, for those who fulfilled for their part the provision that were commissioned from them by Generalitat officials – . It is obvious to say that it is impossible that the process described in the previous letter could have taken place without the realisation of the corresponding public expenditure. Expenses such as the regarding institutional advertising, organisation of the electoral administration, preparation of the register of Catalans abroad, electoral material, payment of international observers, computer applications, venues for the poll count, etc. For this, after the experience of the 9 November [2014] poll that finished with the requirement of accountable responsibility before the Court of Auditors of the main leaders of the then Government of the Generalitat, the idea was generated to trick, to circumvent the State’s control of the accounts of the Generalitat, to which the Autonomous Communities subjected themselves voluntarily in order to obtain State funding if they found themselves in a situation of economic straits. This can be seen in the legal regulation of such controls in the 1st Additional Provision of Organic Law 2/2012, of 27 April, of Budgetary Stability and Financial Stability and in Article 22.3 of Royal decree-Law 17/2014, regulator of the Autonomic Liquidity Fund (FLA).

 All this activity of the organisation of the referendum is being investigated by Investigating Court No. 13 of Barcelona in preliminary investigation 118/2017 for the alleged non-privileged authors of whom no signs have been perceived of their connection with what is being investigated in this Special Case or in the cases being investigated before the TSJC. The orderly actions of the indicated court body, especially entries and searches, have led to the contribution of essential evidence that, once properly testified and entered in the plenary of this Special Case, will show the illicit activities developed for the holding of the referendum, both in his logistical and economic aspects. It was precisely, on occasion of some these court acts of entrance and searches, carried out by the Unit of Judicial Police of the VII Zone of the Civil Guard and the corresponding Lawyer of the Administration of Justice that there were tumultuous acts, where organised groups and ordinary citizens, duly mobilised through the social networks, attempted to prevent or prevented the implementation of the legitimate mandates of the judicial authority for the investigation of the commission of the offences.

Without needing to transcribe the extensive articles to which we have referred above, both of Law 2/2012 and of Royal decree-Law 17/2014, suffice it to say that their norms allow – but do not force – Autonomous Communities needing liquidity for the payment of their obligations, to have the contributions of the State as long as they supply periodically the economic-financial information that is detailed (public guarantees, commercial debt, operations with derivatives and any other passive contingent), assume commitments and plans that drive to the budgetary stability and to the fulfilment of the aims of public deficit and broadcast of public debt, payment to providers, fulfilment of the rules on late payment and other European rules on these matters. It entails the compulsory assumption of these obligations of periodic information and fulfilment of aims through plans approved by the State that can moreover be completed or expanded in their requests by the Ministry of the Treasury in accordance with the specific circumstances of the Autonomous Community, and contemplates the consequences of non-compliance with these obligations.

In application of these provisions – that have been summarily explained, as they are not the object of this document of criminal indictment –, in view of the facts that have been described and the very grave risks that they could amount to for the financial sustainability of the Autonomous Community, the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Issues adopted various measures of reinforcement of the instruments of control of the accounts of Catalonia that were intensified inasmuch as the non-compliance by part of the authorities of this Autonomous Community aggravated, culminating with the adoption of the agreement of the Senate of 27 October 2017 for the application of Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution.

As early as 2015, when the public debt of the Generalitat of Catalonia was described by private credit rating agencies as speculative investment or “junk bonds” and the non-payment of the debt to pharmacies and other providers was made public, dictated the agreement of the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs of 20 November 2015, published by Order PRE/2454/2015, of 20 November (BOE 21 November 2015) on measures to guarantee in the Autonomous Community of Catalonia the provision of public services in defence of the general interest. They imposed obligations of periodic information to all the Catalan public sector, as well as restrictions both on the payment of bills through the FLA and on the destination that had to be given to the monthly resources assigned to the Autonomous Community in concept of finance. Among other measures, the resources that the autonomous Community received monthly from State funds would have to be allocate to the essential and specific public services (family, health, education…). It imposed likewise a system of payment of the FLA by which the corresponding quantities would be paid directly by the State to the creditors for expenses of basic and priority public services (security, civil defence…) against receipt of the invoices, without going through the Autonomous Community. This agreement, valid today, was not challenged and by virtue of this these obligations of periodic referral of information and certification were fulfilled formally, until September 2017.

 In view of the cancellation by the CC of decisions and norms adopted by the Parliament of Catalonia, as well as of certain budgetary sections in Law 4/2017, of 28 March, of Budgets of the Generalitat of Catalonia, allocated to the holding of the referendum, and taking in consideration the increase of the risk premium of the Autonomous Community and the relation of this magnitude with the will expressed by several political leaders, who are defendants in this Special Case, concerning the referendum process, the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs adopted a second agreement, on 21 July 2017, published by Order FOR/686/2017, of 21 July (BOE 22 July 2017), by which new additional measures are adopted to guarantee in the Autonomous Community of Catalonia the provision of public services in defence of the general interest and the fulfilment of the Constitution and of the laws.

 It is interesting, in the explanatory part, to read the reasons that led to the establishment of these additional measures:

 “Despite the above, in the last weeks there has been a succession of new events that make self-evident the need to strengthen the control of the economic-financial information of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia. The decision of the Constitutional Court of 4 April 2017, by which admits to be processed the non-constitutionality appeal promoted by the President of the Government, decided the suspension of the force of Additional Provision 40, paras 1 and 2, of Law 4/2017, of 28 March, of the Parliament of Catalonia of Budgets of the Generalitat of Catalonia for 2017, and several budgetary sections, inasmuch as they are allocated to give financial coverage of the expenses of the referendum call referred to in the quoted Additional Provision. This decision has been personally notified to the officials that are listed in the fourth section of the same, among whom is included the General Compoller of the Generalitat of Catalonia.

Later, on 5 July a judgment of the Constitutional Court decided to deem the unconstitutionality and nullity of Additional Provision 40 of Law of Catalonia 4/2017, of 28 March of Budgets of the Generalitat for 2017, with the scope determined in legal foundation 12. Likewise, it declares that the budgetary sections GO 01 D/227.0004/132, DD 01 D/227.004/132 and DD 01/22700157/132 of programme 132 are unconstitutional should they be allocated to the funding of the referendum process referred to in Additional Provision 40 of the Law.

 In this regard, in the last certification sent on Thursday 13 July 2017 by the Comptroller-General of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, it was certified that up to the end of June 2017 obligations in the programme «132. Organisation, management and follow-up of electoral processes» have been recognised for 19·37 thousand euros, and have permissions and provisions of expenditure for 25·52 thousand euros have been recognised (6·15 thousand additional euros above the data of the preceding month).

In this context, section IV.6 of the programme of the Autonomic Liquidity Funds applicable for the 2017 fiscal year, on reinforced control, foresees the additional reference of specific information, between which finds the «particular monitoring, with the detail that will be established, of the state of implementation of the public expenditure of the community and dependent bodies, as well as of particular lines of expenditure that, on the grounds of quantity, evolution, economic nature or purpose, the MINHAFP may determine that they have to be subjected to special monitoring in the area of a specific Community.»

 In view of the new circumstances referred to, and in order to address the purpose of the budget lines alluded to, on 18 July 207 [sic] the Autonomous Community of Catalonia was required to send a specific report by the Comptroller-General's office of the Community stating the activities undertaken by the Comptroller-General's office or its dependent bodies in relation to the expenditure dossiers transacted with charge to the programme «132. Organisation, management and follow-up of electoral processes» of the general budgets of the community of the 2017 fiscal year, as well as on the possible non-compliance with the resolution of the Constitutional Court cancelling the validity of the challenged budgetary items as well as the complete expenditure dossiers transacted under programme «132. Organisation, management and monitoring of electoral processes» of the general budget of the community for 2017.

To these signs of risk we may add the recent declarations of some of the representatives of their institutions declaring their will to continue with the referendum procedure, which has put at new risk the stability and the normal operation of the Public Authorities and the other institutions of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia and has generated a new situation of economic uncertainty inside it that is prejudicing citizens and companies and therefore financial stability. Evidence of this is the lack of confidence that this has generated in investors in the last few days, as reflected in the risk premium and the impossibility to get funding in the markets.

In response to the described situation, the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs, in order to continue guaranteeing the normal operation of the fundamental public services, in defence of the general interest, considering the Constitutional Court Judgment of 5 July 2017, adopted new additional measures for the Autonomous Community of Catalonia on the development and implementation of the additional mechanisms of funding, that will apply in addition to those already foreseen in the decision by the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs dated 20 November 2015 on measures to guarantee in the autonomous community of Catalonia the provision of the public services in defence of the general interest, that will continue to have full effects, and that involves the initial and monthly certificates mentioned in said agreement being accompanied by the new weekly certificate foreseen in this decision.

To these effects, it is fitting to remember that, as a consequence to subscribing to Autonomous Communities Funding Fund, through the Fund of Autonomic Liquidity compartment, in accordance with what was foreseen in the first additional Provision of Organic Law 2/2012, of 27 April, of budgetary stability and financial sustainability and in Article 22 of Royal decree-Law 17/2014, of 26 December, of measures of financial sustainability of the autonomous communities and local authorities and others of an economic nature, the Autonomous Community of Catalonia has adopted the commitment to fulfil what is laid down in any provision that may develop this funding mechanism”.

This decision intensified the controls, raising to weekly the frequency of the certifications required of the Comptrollers of the various councils and economic-financial managers (comptrollers, General Director of Budgets, General Director of Financial Policies, Insurances and Treasury) in the sense of imposing upon them the obligation to ascertain in each certification that “had not initiated or transacted budgetary modifications, neither dossiers of expenditures or payments that could be allocated to the carrying out of the activities linked with the calling of the referendum that had been declared illegal by Constitutional court judgment of 5 July 2017. In addition to other obligations to inform, the Comptroller-General's office of the Autonomous Community had to send every Wednesday a final certificate to the Ministry of the Treasury through the General Office of Autonomic and Local Finance, attaching individual certificates, as well as informing about any query addressed to the comptrollers or any advisory body or about advice that had as its object the definition of procedures to allow the funding of the planned referendum.

In this context, each of the Departments of the Generalitat were subjected to budget limitations that imply the strictness in the scope of the credits consigned to the state of expenditure of the budget and, in consequence, the legal impossibility to acquire commitments in quantities above the respective amounts. In all of them, the implementation of the public expenditure integrated a process, basically regulated in Article 46 of Legislative Decree 3/2002, which approved the Consolidated Text of the Law of Public Finances of Catalonia (“LCSP”; DOGC of 31 December 2002), in which four phases can be distinguished: a) permission for the expenditure linked to a particular budgetary credit and inside the limits of application of the same, this phase corresponding with the approval of the opening of the dossier to that at present it refers the art. 116 of the Law 9/2017 of 8 November, of agreements of the public sector (LCSP); b) the provision, corresponding to the adjudication and formalization of the work, services or supplies contract and by which the reservation of the credit for a particular amount remains formalised (arts. 150 and 153 of the current LCSP); c) the obligation or operation to contract in accounts the requirable credits from the Generalitat so that, after the delivery of the good or provision of the service, it has been accredited satisfactorily the work which is the object of the provision (this phase corresponds with the delivery of the thing or provision of the service referred to in art. 210 of the current LCSP and determines the existence of a due, liquid and requirable debt that is incorporated into the liabilities of the public heritage regardless of the vicissitudes, the moment in that it is produced and the form that the payment of the money materially takes; and d) finally, the ordering of the payment through the Treasury of the Generalitat, understanding by “payment order” the operation by which the competent administrative authority issues, in relation to a specific obligation, the money order through the Public Treasury of the Generalitat (art. 198 of the current LCSP) and the material payment of the bill regardless even of the nullity of the procurement dossier, if it really has carried out the service or has delivered the thing, for were this not the case, an unfair enrichment would occur in favour of the Administration that has caused the vice of nullity of the dossier, thus damaging the provider.

The permission for the expenditure, the provision and the obligation are acts attributed to the upper organs of each competent Ministry as a function of the quantity and the committed budget line (article 47 of the Legislative Decree 3/2002), but the ordering of the payment is not attributed to the agent of the credit but regardless of which administrative body was involved in the contractual provision, the Minister of Economy and Finances is always competent (article 48 of the Legislative Decree) as “orderer of the payment”, without prejudice to the general or singular delegations that may occur.

On 25 July 2017 the plenary of the autonomic Government decided to present a contentious-administrative appeal against the decision dated 21 July 2017, requesting its suspension and at the same time resolving to take over all the powers related to the fulfilment of the appealed decision in favour of the Ministers of each department, except those specifically related to the functions of the comptrollers that remained taken over and concentrated by the Comptroller-General. By virtue of this, the weekly certificates demanded in the decision dated 21 July 2017, passed to be signed by each Minister, by the Vice-president and Minister of Economy and Treasury, defendant Oriol Junqueras or by the Comptroller-General, according to each case. This was to keep the respectively concerned civil servants outside any criminal responsibilities that might be generated and, at the same time, to concentrate all the responsibility in the members of the Government of Catalonia and in the Comptroller-General. Each of them issued the required certificates until the month of September. The contentious-administrative appeal was declared finished, on account of the loss of object, as the resolution appealed against had been repealed.

In September 2017, the Comptroller-General of the Generalitat stopped sending information to the Ministry of the Treasury. The Vice-president and Minister of Economy and Treasury, the defendant Oriol Junqueras, by means of a letter dated 13 September 2017, addressed to the Minister of Economy and the Civil Service, said that they were stopping assuming the obligation to send accountancy information and, as hierarchical official, he dispensed the comptrollers concerned from doing so. That is to say, he expressed simply the will to non comply with the obligations of information and certification in economic-financial matters as laid down in the legal norms and decisions of the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs to which we have referred. The reasons that were given in this letter leave no room for doubt: the Parliament of the Autonomous Community has approved the Law of the self-determination referendum, the Government of the Generalitat has summoned it and the State seeks to control the Autonomous Community in matters of a political character, that do not have anything to do with budgetary stability, so that it has issued a decision of the Government of the Generalitat which “exempts and dispenses those who are responsible for sending the information required by the CDGAE decision dated 21 July”. Besides, it seems that the resolution by the courts of the administrative appeal and of the suspension request are not reasons to be taken into account at the moment of adopting the decision to break with the obligations imposed by the norms in force.

 In these circumstances, faced with the grave breakdown of the principles of Organic Law 2/2002 and the non-compliance with the rest of the economic obligations-financial assumed by the Government of the Generalitat, the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs, by a decision dated 15 September 2017, published by Order HFP/878/2017, of 15 September (BOE of 16 September 2017), increased the controls established, and at that moment already broken, and set up a mechanism of management of payments of particular budgetary credits in a direct way to the providers, creditors of the Generalitat, only against invoices communicated by the Comptroller-General. In addition to this, it subjected to the prior permission of the Council of Ministers all the debt operations of the Community, including short-term operations. Among many other measures, it laid down that all the contracting bodies and comptrollers that controlled the administrative acts designed for the delivery of goods or provision of services to the Autonomous Community of Catalonia or its public sector bodies, had to issue a “responsibility statement” stating that it had evidence that said goods or services bore no relation to the funding of illegal activities, and had to deliver said responsible statement to the provider and to the Ministry of the Treasury. It also laid down that the Generalitat could not order the material realisation of any payment by means of services hired with entities of credit – basically, bank transfers – without accompanying a certificate by the comptroller allowing checks that the payment bore no relation of any kind with the funding of illegal activities or those forbidden by the Courts.

As has already been indicated above, Decrees 139 and 140/2017 of 6 September had, respectively, decided the announcement of the referendum for 1 October and the approval of the complementary norms for his realisation, and standing out in the latter, as far as the alleged crime of misuse of public funds is concerned, was Final Provision 2 where it is stated that “the Government of the Generalitat is authorised to carry out the approval of the expenditure and the necessary administrative acts to make effective the holding of the Referendum, including the placement at its disposal of the human, material and technological resources it has”.

In implementation of Final Provision 2, on 7 September 2017, the Government of the Generalitat – at the proposal of defendant the vice-president Oriol Junqueras and the Ministers of Presidency Jordi Turull and of Institutional and Foreign Affairs Raúl Romeva–, adopted a specific decision in which it authorised to the different departments were authorised to carry out the actions and necessary contracts for the realisation of the referendum. The Government of the Generalitat constituted as electoral administration and in consequence weighs on him the obligation to facilitate and supply the resources, material and necessary instruments so that it have effect, deciding that the decisions and performances to facilitate the holding of 1 October “will be taken in a collective and collegiate way by the members of the Government, and shared with solidarity”.

 This decision, that appears as annex to the preliminary investigation by the Civil Guards No. 2018-101743-034 is very expressive as regards the committing and the authorship of the crime of misuse of public funds. All that has to be done is to read the text – the original, in Catalan – which states that it is an implementation of Law 19/2017, of the Referendum, of Decree 139/2017, of Announcement and of Decree 140/2017, of complementary norms, specifically of its Additional Provision 2 quoted above. According to these norms - first suspended in their effects and finally declared to be unconstitutional and invalid by the Constitutional Court – the Government of Catalonia, without observing the court rulings and holding them to be valid, says in its Decision that they are the foundation for the permission for the Government for the approval of the public expenditure, the necessary administrative actions and the use of public building belonging to the Generalitat and to the public sector that might be necessary for the holding of the referendum. In consequence, the Government decided on the carrying out of the contracts, the approval of the expenditures and the political-administrative actions necessary to hold it. Specifically, by way of illustration and not with a limiting nature, it authorises:

 - The preparation, printing, procurement and distribution of the necessary electoral material (ballot boxes, voting ballots, envelopes, polling table counts, manual of operation of the electoral tables, accreditations, credentials…).

 - The preparation of the electoral census by means of all the public registers that belong to the Generalitat of Catalonia, its formal communication and sending, if need be, to the citizens and their printing, to be used on the day of the vote in accordance with the rules of data protection.

 - The communication, to the Catalans resident abroad with the right to vote, of the mechanism by means of which they will be able to exert their right to vote.

 - The preparation of an informative website and the acquisition or reservation of domains and services of accommodation, as well as the use of the existent.

 - The commission, contracting and design of the campaigns of institutional communication, as well as the related with the collaborators of the electoral administration.

 - Definition of the census sections and the electoral tables and the appointment and the formal communication of the members of the electoral Bureaus.

 - Use of the spaces owned, or with the right of use, by the Generalitat of Catalonia and organs and dependent bodies.

 - The creation of a register of collaborators of the electoral administration.

 - The use, in general, of the human, material and technological resources needed to guarantee the suitable organisation and development of Catalonia’s self-determination referendum, as well as those which it already has.

 In compliance with this common decision, various departments, with the concert of all the members of the Government without exception, carried out a set of expenditures to organise the referendum, dodging at the same time the controls established to guarantee the budgetary stability and financial sustainability of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia.

 The Generalitat also presented a contentious-administrative appeal against this decision of the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs dated 15 September 2017 and requested its suspension; this was turned down by the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court. This appeal has also been turned down with regard to its content, the lawfulness of the system of control of the Catalan public finances by the Ministry of the Treasury was confirmed by the Judgment dated 17 October 2018, issued in contentious-administrative appeal 581/2017, so any non-compliance with the Generalitat was turned into unjustifiable, and the reception of data from the Generalitat by the Ministry of the Treasury was validated, much of this data nourishes the incriminating evidence of this Special Case, inasmuch as the alleged crime of misuse of public funds is concerned.

The quoted Judgment points out that the measure decided by the Ministry of the Treasury is independent of the declaration and application of Article 155 of the Constitution, that is to say, it amounts to the exercise of the State’s own administrative powers. It is worth highlighting aspects of the text that are of interest to the present criminal case:

“Legal foundation 3: (…) A proclaimed vocation and will of the Government of the Generalitat appears, as the State Attorney points out: to spend public money to organise an unconstitutional referendum. This vocation needs public resources that are going to be allocated from the budgetary provision challenged in this appeal and declared unconstitutional by the Judgment of 5 July 2017. And these public resources are obtained through mechanisms of external funding such as the funds granted to the Generalitat as an integral part of the FLA, and these funds obviously may not be used to achieve an unconstitutional end.

(…) 1.5. The appealing Community is tied by its own acts and by the conditions that it imposed on itself when accepting funding through one of the instruments of budgetary stability to apply the funds obtained to offer public services of general interest in its territory. It can not allocate them to fund processes deemed unconstitutional with a breakdown of public services that it is obliged to, and breaking the principle of competence that its financial autonomy it linked to.

 1.6. The Generalitat has adhered voluntarily to the FLA with all the consequences. It is evident that said adhesion forces it to respect the normative framework of the FLA in which are inserted not only the legal norms (Organic Law 2/2012 and Royal decree-Law 17/2014), but also the provisions of development and the decisions that the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs may adopt.

 The Generalitat knows its commitment and that it cannot unilaterally disconnect itself from it. If it receives funds from the FLA it has to respect the norms of expenditure of the FLA. The State Attorney points out that reality shows in an ostensible way that the Generalitat is unable to fund itself in other markets, or rather it is unable to obtain funding of any kind given its critical economic situation.

 (…) To allocate public funds to hold a referendum deemed unconstitutional constitutes an infringement of the norms of budgetary stability in addition to the budgetary legality proclaimed in the Constitution, the Statute of autonomy of Catalonia and the Laws of Treasury and Finances of Catalonia and requires an answer that accommodates the contribution of public funds through the FLA to the legitimate constitutional ends that cannot be other than the public services that it ought to offer the Autonomous Community by applying said funds to the corresponding expenditure.

 (…) The challenged decision does not address the situation described in Article 25 of Organic Law 2/2012 nor is this legal precept the only possible way of accommodating the uncontrolled behaviour of an Autonomous Community in the management and application of its public funds of budgetary stability to the legal framework and also by conventional extension accepted by said Autonomous Community, especially when this situation is not a singular or bilateral situation of State and the appealing Autonomous Community, but rather is part of a complex legal obligation of the State with regard to the EU (article 135 of the Constitution), of Catalonia with regard to the other Autonomous Communities and of all of them with regard to the State, so that the breakdown of the funding model makes an impact on the State and on the other Autonomous Communities as laid down in a precise and detailed form in the challenged decision and may even make an impact on the State’s compliance with regard to the EU, and it should be recalled the LOEP subjects this obligation of management to the principle of responsibility on the part of whoever breaks it”.

On 27 October 2017 “Royal Decree 944/2017, of 27 October by which organs and authorities are designated with the role of giving fulfilment to the measures directed to the Government and the Administration of the Generalitat of Catalonia and authorised by the decision of the Plenary of the Senate of 27 October 2017, under Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution” came into effect. By virtue of the powers established therein, the Government’s Delegated Committee for Economic Affairs issued the decision dated 21 December 2017, valid until 2 June 2018, which adopted new measures of control and various other decisions. In Section 7, the previous decision of 15 September 2017 was left without effect.

The legal deeds, acts and businesses, attributed to each and every one one of the members of the Government of the Generalitat that we have indicated, and that constitute a crime of misuse of public funds, are the following:

1. In the logistics of the referendum the activity of the Centre of Telecommunications and Technologies of the Information (CTTI), a body of public law with its own legal personality, created by the Law 15/1993, of 28 December, was very prominent. The Centre is ascribed to the Department of the Presidency, governed at the time of the events by the defendant Jordi Turull Negre. One of its functions is the coordination, the supervision and the control of the implementation of the systems and services of telecommunications needed to satisfy the needs of the Administration of the Generalitat in this matter (articles 1 and 2 of the Law).

To favour the implementation of the illegal poll, various websites, applications, platforms and computer programs, created inside its activity, and these were used to carry out the illegal referendum of 1 October, by giving digital support to the dissemination of information, search, registers, the vote count and the specific operative specific for the referendum, the control of which was ultimately and in reality exercised by Minister Turull.

Many of these pages were created in duplicate, and were opened as soon as the State Security forces and corps closed others, and the following, among others can stand out:

 - The referendum.cat website, that was opened on 6 September 2017 and immediately after the announcement of the referendum call by Decree 139/2017 (also the domain referendum.eu).

 - Inside the domain referendum.cat, an application called "Cridas" (in Spanish, calls) was created, the URL of which on the website was https://connectat.voluntariat.gencat.cat/crida/66. The application was used to recruit as many as 47,498 volunteers to cover the needs that the realisation of the referendum, as regards the constitution of the 2,706 voting tables, entailed.

- Also inside the referendum.cat domain several links referring to the referendum were activated, such as a page devoted to how had to exert the right to vote or another one oriented to the register of Catalans abroad (registrecatalans.exteriors.gencat.cat) as this registration was required in order for them to be able to vote.

The quantity of the destined public funds spent on this activity is not yet available, but it is evident that all these actions could not be free of charge, as they include a number of things that need to be hired from third parties, such as buying of the name of the domain, accommodation on servers with sufficient capacity to bear probably very intense traffic, design of the web, possible creation of apps, maintenance of the stability of the system, etc., and this necessarily meant expenditure of public money for those that only can de done by private bodies outside the Centre itself – as the registering of the domain – or at least the illegitimate allocation of public resources to these illicit activities for which could be done by this public body’s own personnel.

2. For the organisation of the venues in which the voting would take place, Carles Puigdemont – in absentia in procedural terms – and defendant Oriol Junqueras, from the Presidency and Vice-Presidency of the Generalitat, sent on 6 September 2017 a letter to all the mayors of Catalonia in which they asked them to lend all the voting centres usually used in electoral processes.

This work was also carried out by those who are also in absentia, Antoni Comín Oliveres, Minister of Health, and Marta Rovira, General Secretary of ERC-, who took part in the search for the venues in which to instal the polling stations.

Since many of the polling stations were situated in Centres of Primary Attention (CAP) or other health installations, on 22 September 2017, the Minister of Health Antoni Comín, to ensure that the lending of these polling stations would remain exclusively subject to his personal decision without the possibility of any opposition, decided to sack the representatives of the Government in the 29 health consortiums and public health bodies of Catalonia, and appointed himself as president and the responsible person in all their governing boards, as was already the case for the Health Consortium of Barcelona. He also announced that the sacking would be reversed once 1 October had passed.

Likewise, the Minister of Education Clara Ponsatí – also in absentia –, as well as the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, defendant Dolors Bassa, on 29 September 2017, with the purpose of ensuring the availability of the polling stations that were committed to the holding of the referendum, acted in a way similar to that of the Minister of Health on 22 September, so that they took over the direction and decision on the schools and the civic centres, respectively, that depended on their respective Departments.

Thus the venues and public centres were allocated, by the collegiate and joint decision of all the members of the Government, to an end that had declared to be illegal in numerous rulings of the Constitutional Court and in the court actions underway in the TSJC (High Court). The latter ruled by means of a ruling dated 27 September 2017 that the referendum of 1 October was illegal, forbade its carrying out and ordered the security forces and corps (Mossos d'Esquadra, Civil Guards and National Body of Police) to confiscate the material, close the schools and prevent the vote.

 The venues were occupied by the population prior to 1 October, in order to prevent their closure, which had been ordered to the security forces and corps by the court authority, and were employed finally as points for voting or polling stations during the day mentioned.

The economic cost that the use during a day of the more than 2.259 venues, as voting points, entailed, has been put by experts at 900,000 euros.

 3. Institutional advertising related with the referendum. With regard to publicity for the illegal referendum and to encourage participation in it, the Department of the Presidency, directed by Jordi Turull, again articulated and funded with public resources the following campaigns and actions:

a) The international campaign of the referendum.- The Department of the Presidency awarded to HAVAS MEDIAthe written press of a conference on the Catalan referendum in several international media. The total amount of the adjudication was 127.810,57 euros (VAT included). The obligations contracted in relation to the credit of the expenditures of this campaign were recognised in the Electronic Manager of Procurement dossiers on 14 and 21 February 2017 and credited to HAVAS MEDIA GROUP by means of a transfer on 31 May 2017 of 110,263.51 euros, with charge to budgetary section DD04 D/2260003000/1210/0000. In the certificates issued by the Comptroller-General's office and sent to the Ministry of the Treasury in fulfilment of the budgetary obligations established in the months of June and July 2017, there was no warning of any kind about the nature and illegality of this payment.

b) The “Register of Residents abroad” campaign, undertaken by the Department of the Presidency between the months of February and May of 2017 by means of adverts encouraging the registering, which was indispensable for the vote, in which the question “Yes or No?” appears on a map of Catalonia. The contracts associated with this campaign were signed with:

ESTUDI DADA SL (dossier PR-2017-130) that issued an invoice for 10,829 euros for creating the advert.

UTE NOTHINGAD And KARDUMEN (dossier PR-2016/432), that issued an invoice for 97,332.63 euros, for disseminating the advert on the Web.

FOCUS MEDIA S.L. (dossier PR-2016/426 that corresponds to a framework contract for a much higher quantity), issued an invoice, for advertising insertion, for 158,344.41 euros.

The provision of the services to which these bills refer is certified in their totality and the obligation of their payment recognised, in both the invoices were certified as “satisfied” by the autonomic Administration, although a part at least of their amount remained without crediting by virtue of the existence of preliminary investigation 118/2017 of Investigating Court number 13 of Barcelona. The three companies demand payment and, since the services described in the bills were indeed supplied, the Generalitat will have to meet these payments.

Teresa Guix Requejo, a self-employed person that regularly works for the Generalitat, was paid for several tasks, and specifically the sum of 2,700 euros, for designing the pactepelreferendum.cat website, which was needed for enrolling in the register.

 

In all 2,700 euros were credited for this concept. Expenditure of 10,829 + 97,332.63+ 158,334.41 = 266,496.04 euros was committed. The public heritage was damaged to the tune of 269,196.04 euros.

c) The CIVISME campaign, also organised from the Department of the Presidency, at the end of August 2017, to improve civic behaviour, promote the values of the democracy, the social welfare and the culture of peace and solidarity, centred on the advert called the “The Railway Lines”, in which train rails forking out are shown.

The contract for the dissemination of this advert was channeled through dossier PR-2017-1992 by means of the procedure of derived adjudication in the framework agreement for services of management and insertion of advertising. It was awarded successively to the companies CARAT and then to FOCUS and both turned it down on realising that it amounted to propaganda of the illegal referendum under the unreal apparel of the formal object of the civic campaign.

The Department of the Presidency, directed by Turull, then entrusted the campaign to the Catalan Corporation of Audiovisual Media (CCMA), a public body under the authority of the Generalitat, funded in 2017 with a 371 million euro grant, within a budget line approved by the autonomic Parliament, whose mission is to produce and disseminate audiovisual products ensuring Catalan linguistic and cultural normalisation. The commission was made through Jaume Mestre Anguera, responsible for Institutional dissemination in the Department of the Presidency. The CCMA managers understood the campaign as a political, not an institutional, campaign and subject thus to be paid by the Generalitat – as any other advertiser would do – and not included in the obligations of an institutional public service that the above-mentioned grant funds directly.

 The CCMA disseminated the announcements through the TV channels of TV, radio stations and digital means that it managed, and generated two invoices charged to the Department of the Presidency, dated 14 September and 5 October 2017, for the respective amounts of 93,179.56 euros and 184,624.85 euros. The corresponding expenditure was committed and both invoices were included in the “Immediate provision of VAT information” platform of the Ministry of the Treasury on 18 September and 6 October 2017 respectively. They have not been paid, for which reason the CCMA has claimed this amount out of court by making a request, and proposes to also do so – according to statements in the instruction phase by its top representative – before the courts if this payment is not made. In any case, the public purse suffered a detriment derived from the committed expenditure for the dissemination of the campaign or of its cost, borne by the CCMA, that issued these announcements in place of others that would have yielded the corresponding income.

4. The expenditure as regards the supply of ballot papers, to the electoral census and to the citations to people to belong to the polling teams, undertaken by UNIPOST, S.A., for a total of 979,661.96 euros divided, to hide them, between five Departments (the one directed by defendant Oriol Junqueras – Vicepresidency –, Jordi Turull – Presidency –, Dolors Bassa – Labour –; and the Ministers whose procedural situation is in absentia, Comin – Health –, and Puig – Culture –). Of this material, registered letters 1,811 with acknowledgement of receipt were intercepted on 19 September by Civil Guards in UNIPOST’s Manresa headquarters, and the next day 43,429 envelopes with electoral documentation were intercepted at the Tarrasa [sic] headquarters, that were therefore not distributed as had been foreseen. There is no evidence these invoices were paid, as the Generalitat refused the payment when they were presented, but the expenditure was already committed.

On 7 September 2017 UNIPOST delivered to the mentioned departments of the Generalitat five invoices, as follows:

 - Invoice 90659346 P, for 196,696.98 euros without VAT to the Department for culture.

 - Invoice 90659348 P, for 193,889.98 euros without VAT to the Department of the Vicepresidency, Economy and Treasury.

 - Invoice 90659349 P, for 192,711.20 euros without VAT, to the Department of Health.

 - Invoice 90659350 P, for 197,492.04 euros without VAT, to the Department of Labour.

 - Invoice 90659351 P, for 198,871.76 euros without VAT, to the Department of the Presidency.

In all, 979,661.96 euros invoiced exactly to these departments and on dates close to the confiscation of the electoral material by the Civil Guards, and this makes one assume that what was invoiced for this order was related with the preparation of the illegal referendum.

The administrators of UNIPOST later cancelled the mentioned invoices. But, following the previously presented reasoning, this does not mean that its credit against the Generalitat does not exist or has been cancelled, since the preparation of this work was carried out by UNIPOST, and it was not concluded through no fault of their own, as a consequence of the search and confiscation carried out by the Civil Guards. That is to say, the credit of the company against the Public Treasury exists regardless of what became of the bills as mercantile documents and their credit and payment.

UNIPOST is at present in insolvency and what has been said it the result of the report by the bankruptcy administrator, Sra. Elena Folgueras Sans, employee of the firm JAUSAS LEGAL Y TRIBUTARIO, S.L.P., contributed to the Investigating Court No. 13 of BCN that we attached to this text as DOCUMENT Number 1. In said report the aforementioned bills appear as cancelled, in spite of which there is evidence that after the cancellation moves were made to receive payment for some of them. To this effect, the attempt to receive later payment is recorded in Preliminary investigation 2018-101743-023, of the Court Police Unit of the VII Command of the Civil Guard.

5. For the referendum signage, from the Department of the Presidency, although said commission cariied this out simulating that the request was issued by Omnium Cultural, the preparation of posters was commissioned to three firms: ARTIPLAN, MARC MARTI and GLOBAL SOLUTIONS.

On 15 September 2017, the Court Police Organic Unit of the Civil Guard of Barcelona, searched the firm MARC MARTÍ, domiciled in calle Pallars 110 and in calle Pujades 94 of Barcelona, 87,516 advertising posters of the referendum of various sizes.

On 16 September, the same police group took part in the installations of the firm ZUKOY 5 SL, domiciled in calle Alarcón 42 of Sant Adriá of Besòs (Barcelona), several printing plates of signage related to the referendum.

On this same date, the same unit confiscated 113,000 referendum flyers in the headquarters of the firm ENCUADERNACIONES ROVIRA SL, domiciled in calle Bernat Metge 92, Sabadell (Barcelona).

Also on this date, 507,000 flyers and 750,000 brochures of the referendum were confiscated from the firm BUZONEO DIRECT SL, domiciled in calle Poblet 85, Moncada [sic] i Reixach (Barcelona).

On 24 September 2017, the above-mentioned police unit confiscated from the firm DISNET SISTEMAS DE DISTRIBUCION S.A., domiciled in calle Can Camps 15, on the Can Roquet Industrial estate of Sabadell, 400,000 flyers format Din-A5, 15,000 brochures format Din-A3, 11,000 brochures format Din-A4 and 30,000 posters, all related to the referendum.

It is not known for the time being, the amount of public funds devoted to the quoted activity, though it is evident that, having issued the commission, a debt has been generated in the public heritage, - that it will be able to determine later on - as we will point out in the section on the civil responsibility derived from the offence.

6. The external action developed by the Generalitat in favour of the rebel [sic] process.

As early as 2015, the Government of the Generalitat deployed budgets, general policies and specific actions to endow itself with an international projection. In the design of the adopted strategy, the achievement of support in sectors of public opinion of other countries and the internationalisation of the conflict with Spain acquired an enormous transcendence with a view to forcing an international mediation and the support of the European Union.

To this end, in February 2016 within the structure of the Government of the Generalitat, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Institutional Relations and Transparency was created. This name was challenged by the Government of the Nation and, after CC judgment of 21 June 2016, it was renamed Department of Institutional and Foreign Affairs and Relations, and Transparency, headed by the defendant Raúl Romeva. In 2017, the Parliament of Catalonia decided to increased its budgetary endowment by 107%, raising to 35 million euros the funds earmarked for the powers of Foreign Affairs, out of the 64 million euros total of the Department (in the 2015 budget, the previous one in force, the public funds devoted to the powers of Foreign Affairs had been half that amount, viz. 17 million). The Budget was published by Law 4/2017, of 28 March (DOGC of 30 March). From this Department and under the direction of the above-mentioned defendant the following actions aimed to promote the referendum in the international field were carried out, among various others):

a) Delegations of the Government of the Generalitat abroad.

As early as 2016, the autonomic Government announced that at the end of 2017 the Delegations would have increased in number from 5 to 17 and, sure enough, a number were opened in addition to several European countries, in the European Union and in United States, and it was foreseen to extend the Delegations to Lisbon, Rome, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Geneva, Zagreb, Rabat, Seoul, Buenos Aires and Mexico. The defendant Raul Romeva defended in the Catalan Parliament the increase of the budgetary allocation devoted to the opening of new Delegations abroad, of 3 to 6·5 million euros in 2017, on the basis of “preparing the constituent process of the Catalan Republic” (the news can be consulted, for example, in https://www.elmundo.es/cataluna/2017/01/17/587e4a3122601dad1a8b45f0.html). In accordance with this aim, of the 35 million euros earmarked, 23 correspond to expenditure on personnel and operational costs while 12 million euros were allocated to specific actions, in which the action of the Catalan presidency abroad, that absorbed 2·3 million euros, stands out. Besides, they deployed actions to facilitate the vote of Catalans abroad (section 3) and diplomatic actions or lobbying aimed at generating a favourable international image of the process described throughout this text, and these continued to be carried out even after the Constitutional Court forbade, in its Judgment of 5 July 2017, the allocation of any budget line to these ends. Thus, the representative of the autonomic Government to the European Union gave a speech on 21 September in an event organised in the Committee of the Regions by the “European Alliance” group on the alleged repression that Catalonia suffers, placing Spain outside the European parameters of democracy, and appealing to the mediating role of the European Commission.

 b) The international image campaign of the Generalitat.

The Council of Public Diplomacy of Catalonia (Diplocat), regulated by Decree 149/2012, is according to Article 1 of its Statutes “a body of a consortial character, endowed with its own legal personality, subjected to the public legal framework”, one of the aims of which is “to give support to the public diplomacy strategy of the Government of Catalonia” (art. 2).

Under the appearance of a public-private consortium, Diplocat works in complete linkage with the Generalitat whose participation in it is over 90%, approves and modifies by Decree its budget, holds the same number of votes as the rest of the members of the Plenary and can decide at its own initiative the dissolution of the consortium (article 27). Besides, its President is the President of the Generalitat himself, and he holds the casting vote (article 13).

From the budgetary point of view Law 4/2017, of 28 March, of the budget of the Generalitat of Catalonia for the year 2017 distinguished between consortia with majority participation, whose budgets are integrated into that of the Generalitat (article 1.f), and those with a non majority participation, whose budgets are incorporated in the budget of the Generalitat (article 1.2). Article 2.7 of this legal document lists the consortia whose budgets are integrate in the general budget of the autonomous community and the third on the list is Diplocat, in spite of this body having an approximate budgetary arrangement.

From the economic-financial point of view, Diplocat is classed within the public sector of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, as “autonomic Public Administration”, for the purpose of the 2010 European System of Accounts, as recorded in the Inventory of bodies of Autonomous communities, and the Generalitat is responsible for all the expenditure for premises and necessary services for its operation, including those corresponding to personnel and operations (article 24 of the Statutes). The financial control of Diplocat is carried out by means of audits under the direction of the Comptroller-General of the Generalitat of Catalonia, in accordance with the regulatory rule of the public finances.

In this context, Diplocat acted as a kind of parallel diplomatic body to that of the State, and as a privileged lobbying tool it disseminated the pro-independence message and objective in several countries. In the first months of 2017 two international forums were held in Barcelona on the matter and a programme of visitors and international observers was deployed with the above-stated aim. This work has materialised in third countries by means of agreements with local institutions.

To be specific, the Delegation of the Government of Catalonia in the United States, in the name and representation of the Generalitat, signed on 15 August 2017 an agreement with the consultancy firm “S.G.R. Government Relations and Lobbying”, registered in the FARA register of the U.S. Department of Justice by which, following payment of 60,000 euros, for three extendable months, it committed itself to procure meetings with media, chambers of commerce, organisations and civil servants of the legislative powers and executive for the realisation of “political activities” of dissemination. Between them, it is registered in FARA that it apparently put at the disposal of journalists the press release that the president of the Generalitat issued after the events of 20 September, sending them to the information timeline on the situation of Catalonia in real time, created to this effect by The Washington Post newspaper. Together with letters of support for the referendum, other documents indicate that the lobby worked for the Generalitat and offered high Catalan officials the possibility of putting them in touch with interested people. The then-President of the Generalitat – today in absentia, in procedural terms in this Special Cause – appeared in several North American media, and published on 22 September 2017 in The Washington Post an article titled “Sorry, Spain. Catalonia is voting on independence, whether you like it or not”, and was interviewed on 28 September by the New York Times.

These actions were crucial to attain the support of more or less well-known people on the international scene, and to keep up the protest in the face of the court closure of the websites of the referendum websites and other court acts. OC [Omnium Cultural], for its part, created in the same way the www.letcatalansvote.org/es website.

 c) The international websites.

The court closure of the first websites created to inform the constituents of the form and place of the vote was by-passed, with clear contempt of the orders of Mr. Judge of Investigating Court number 13 and of Mrs. Judge of the TSJC by means of cloning of the pages and the launching of information from different domains. The members of the Government themselves – now defendants - disseminated this information from the institutional pages of their respective Departments and through their social networks during the days prior to the referendum.

To hamper the intervention of the courts, some of the cloned websites were lodged in national domains or servers of third countries, whose legislation is lax in matter of accommodation of contents on its websites and do not offer other States international cooperation for the closure of these websites or greatly hinder it, whatever the authority that issued the application. Amongst other domains these have been identified : referendum.ws, corresponding to Global Domains International Inc under the national authority of the State Western Samoa, in the Polinesia; referendum.cat, ref1oct.cat, ref1oct.eu and referendum.ws, corresponding to Google, Inc.; and https://twitter.com/ref1oct @ref1oct, corresponding to Twitter, Inc., were all lodged in servers of U.S., as well as the domain ref1oct.eu corresponding to Eurid VZW, situated in Belgium. In total more than 140 websites have been identified, some lodged in various countries of the Asian continent, Oceania or Russia.

Both the delegations of the Catalan Government abroad and Diplocat, under the direction of the defendant Romeva, were of transcendental importance on 1 October. The delegations abroad channeled the votes of the Catalans living out Catalonia, in a double phase: the first, of an electronic nature, and the second in which the citizens had to enrol in the register of Catalans abroad, that sent them automatically to a link where they had to enter their personal data, which in turn allowed access to a website where they downloaded the ballot paper. Once printed and filled in they had to send it to the corresponding Delegation abroad that stored the votes until the moment of the count in the same Delegation, on 1 October. This system motivated the TSJC to order the blockage of the Amazon cloud where the census abroad operated, to prevent it from being used, in spite of which a fair share of the votes were issued. The definitive results offered by the Generalitat include 4,252 favourable votes abroad, 55 against independence and 23 invalid votes.

All this system was already planned normatively in the above-mentioned Decree 140/2017, signed by all the Government of the Generalitat, accused each and every one of them of misuse of public funds as regards those refers to its members that did not escape justice.

 d) The procurement and funding of international experts and observers

Their presence on 1 October was foreseen by the Decree 140/2017, in a lot of detail.

Diplocat, under the direction of defendant Raul Romeva, in his position as Minister of the Department of Institutional and External Relations, hired a series of people whose mission would be to analyse the political context of Catalonia between 4 September and 8 October, from the perspective of the secessionist project and the need of the referendum.

So 30 MPs and euro-MPs were invited, including one from EH-Bildu, coming from Slovenia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Macedonia, Monaco, Sweden and United Kingdom. Diplocat organised their meetings with the President of the Generalitat, the Speaker of the Parliament and the Minister in question, but no with the various interlocutors who were opposed to the referendum. Diplocat also took care of taking them to the polling stations on 1 October.

International observers were also hired. Under the direction of New Zealander Helena Catt, the following were designated for this purpose, and were identified as John Ault, Samuel Cunningham, Lloyd Dalziel, Terry Duffy, Anne Serafini Grandvoinnet, Michael Grange, Steffan Caradog John, and Kimberli Kippen, who were supported by Alex Ollington, Ashley Griffiths, Thomas Fidler and Tobías [sic] Byfield. All travelled to Catalonia on those dates and on some occasion from the month of June. Each signed an individual contract with Diplocat for the credit of their honoraria and expenditure. Within the latter, their expenditure on travel, accommodation and rental for offices was covered, since part of their work was undertaken in Barcelona. This expenditure was credited by Diplocat with charge to a budget line and totalled, in concept of honoraria, 114,592.50 euros and in concept of expenditure for accommodation, trips and others, 62,712 euros.

These quantities are found in various invoices issued between the months of July and November 2017, and were credited between the months of July 2017 and January 2018. The Delegation of the Generalitat in Brussels carried out a payment with a Dinners [sic] Club card, owned by Patronat Catalonia-Mon (name of the predecesor of Diplocat “Patronato de Cataluña-Mundo» - Board of Trustees of Catalonia-World - and before “Patronato Catalán Pro Europa» - Board of Trustees Catalan Pro Europe - and one can see that it is registered on the Public Procurement Platform of the Generalitat in https://contractaciopublica.gencat.cat/ecofin_pscp/appjava/es_es/cap.pscp?reqcode=viewdetail&idcap=373846), for the amount of 40.591 euros, and 2.750 euros remained to be paid. Albert Royo Marine, representative of Diplocat, signed a responsibility statement on these expenditures indicating that they had not gone to any illegal act or one contrary to the decisions of the Courts.

Likewise, Diplocat and MN2S MANAGEMENT LIMITED (a British company devoted mainly to represent actors and artists on live shows, DJs and celebrities, according to its web https://mn2s.com) contracted on 5 September 2017, with Mr. Wim Kok – Willem “Wim” Kok is a Dutch politician who had been President of his country – the presence on 1 October of a group of observers and experts whose honoraria, flights and accommodation totalled 54,030 euros, credited by Diplocat to the entity MN2S, although later this company gave back said sum, when it discovered what had happened was illegal.

 The fraud against the public Treasury, by taking on pecuniary obligations by Government of the Generalitat officials, whether or not the outlay has effectively been made, amounts to 60,000 + 114,592.50 + 62,712 + 40,591 + 2,750 euros = 280,645.50 euros. In any event, the quantity of 54,030 euros should also be included, though apparently returned by the MNS2 company, because the return was for causes extraneous to the will of the author after, when the payment had been carried out with public money, the crime of misuse of public funds already had been committed. Without prejudice to what will be indicated in terms of civil responsibility deriving from the offence of misuse of public funds as a result of what the Court of Auditors will calculate, we would have the total sum of 334,675.50 euros. Also included is the amount of the agreement signed with SGR MANAGEMENT LLC because though it was signed on 15 August 2017, months [sic] before the calling of the referendum, however, any of its acts of implementation (such as the publication in The Washington Post) took place on 22 September 2017, which allows us to believe that the agreement was linked directly with the promotion of the illegal poll. Were it not to be thus considered, we would be in front of the total of 274,675.50 euros.

Second.- Legal qualification of the facts

The facts stated above amount to:

 1.- A crime of sedition, contemplated in Articles 544 and 545 of the Criminal Code.

 2.- A crime of misuse of public funds of Article 432, paragraphs 1 and 3 of the Criminal Code.

The referred crimes are in a relation of one arising from the other, given the unity of criminal intent, that is to say, they coincide in the final end being pursued; the logical, temporal and spatial connection of the two criminal types in this specific case; and the integration of both crimes in the same commitment dynamic; all these criteria have been laid down by the Supreme Court as determining that one arises from the other (Judgments of Supreme Court No. 1632/2002, of 9 October; No. 504/2003, of 2 April; No. 336/2014, of 11 April; and No. 863/2015, of 30 December, among others).

 3.- A continued crime of grave contempt of court committed by public authority of Article 410.1 in relation with Article 74 of the Criminal Code.< /br>< /br>

Third.- The participation of the defendants.

1.- The following defendants are responsible for a crime of sedition, as authors:

 a) The following have induced, sustained and directed the sedition as members of the Government: Oriol Junqueras Vies (vice-president of the autonomic Government and Minister of Economy and Treasury of the Generalitat), Joaquim Forn Chiariello (Minister of the Department of Interior), Jordi Turull Negre (Minister of the Department of the Presidency), Raül Romeva Rueda (Minister of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Institutional Relations and Transparency), Josep Rull Andreu (Minister of the Department of Territory and Sustainability), and Dolors Bassa Coll (Minister of the Department of Labour, Social Affairs and Family). All are all officials under the terms of Article 545.1 of the Criminal Code.

 b) The following have induced, sustained and directed the sedition as leaders of civil associations: Jordi Sánchez Picanyol (Chair of the Catalan National Assembly) and Jordi Cuixart Navarro (Chair of Omnium Cultural). Neither them is an official under the terms of Article 545.1 of the Criminal Code.

c) For having induced, sustained and directed the sedition through her position as Speaker of the Parliament of Catalonia: Carme Forcadell Lluis. She is an official under the terms of Article 545.1 of the criminal Code.

 2.- The members of the Government of the Generalitat that adopted the decisions for the implementation and development of the 1 October referendum are responsible, as authors, of a crime of misuse of public funds, having made illegitimate use of public funds: Oriol Junqueras Vies, Joaquim Forn Chiariello, Jordi Turull Negre, Raül Romeva Rueda, Josep Rull Andreu, Dolors Bassa Coll, Meritxell Borrás Solé, Carles Mundó Blanch and Santiago Vila Vicente.

 3.- The following are responsible, in concept of authors, of a crime continued of grave contempt of court [disobedience] committed by an official: Meritxell Borrás Solé (Minister of the Department of Governance, Public Administrations and Housing), Carles Mundó Blanch (Minister of the Department of Justice), Santiago Vila Vicente (Minister of the Department of Enterprise and Knowledge), Lluis María Corominas Díaz (regional MP, first vice-president of the Bureau until July 2017 and chair of the Parliamentary group Junts pel Sí), Lluis Guinó Subirás (regional MP and first vice-president of the Bureau), Anna Simó Castelló (regional MP and first secretary of the Bureau), Ramona Barrufet Santacana (regional MP and fourth secretary), Joan Josep Nuet Pujals (regional MP and third secretary of the Bureau), and Mireia Boya Busquets (chair of the Parliamentary group of the CUP).

Fourth.- Mitigating, aggravating or excluding circumstances

There are no circumstances that modify the criminal responsibility.

Fifth.- Penalties

The following penalties apply to each of the defendants:

a) Oriol Junqueras Vies, 12 years imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

b) Joaquim Forn Chiariello, 11 years and 6 months imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

c) Jordi Turull Negre, 11 years and 6 months imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

d) Raül Romeva Rueda, 11 years and 6 months imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

e) Josep Rull Andreu, 11 years and 6 months imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

f) Dolors Bassa Coll, 11 years and 6 months imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crimes of ordinals 1 and 2.

g) Meritxell Borrás Solé, 7 years imprisonment and 10 years of absolute debarment from public office for the crime of ordinal 2, and a fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically from the exercise of elective public office and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

h) Carles Mundó Blanch, 7 years imprisonment and 10 years of absolute debarment from public office for the crime of ordinal 2, and fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

i) Santiago Vila Vicente, 7 years imprisonment and 10 years of absolute debarment from public office for the crime of ordinal 2, and fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months by the ordinal crime 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

j) Jordi Sánchez Picanyol, 8 years imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment from public office for the crime of ordinal 1.

k) Jordi Cuixart Navarro, 8 years imprisonment and the same time of absolute debarment for the crime of ordinal 1.

l) Carme Forcadell Lluis, 10 years imprisonment and the same time of complete debarment from public office for the crime of ordinal 1.

m) Lluis María Corominas Díaz, a fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

n) Lluis Guinó Subirós, a fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

o) Anna Simó Castelló, a fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

p) Ramona Barrufet Santacana, a fine of 10 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and eight months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

q) Joan Josep Nuet Pujals, a fine of 8 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and four months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels).

 r) Mireia Boya Busquets, a fine of 8 months (with a 100 euro daily quota) and special debarment from public employment or office for a year and four months for the crime of ordinal 3 (specifically, from the exercise of elective public offices and from functions of government and/or administration, be they at local, provincial, autonomic, state or supranational levels)

Sixth.- Civil liability and costs

Civil action is not being exercised, without prejudice to the reference of individuals and of the ruling of the Court of Auditors in compliance with article 18.2 of Organic Law 2/1982, of 12 May, of the Court of Auditors, and with articles 20 (on the State Legal Service in the Court of Auditors) and 49.3 of the Law of Operation of the Court of Auditors, Law 7/1988, of 5 April, for the establishment and definitive claim of the total quantities diverted.

The fixing of the amount of the fraud for criminal purposes has the only purpose of determining if the aggravated level of the crime of misuse of public funds is or is not applicable.

The resulting quantity in this indictment document is 1,971,601.42 euros, resulting from the sum of the following amounts: 110,263.51 + 269,196.04 + 93,179.56 + 184,624.85 + 979,661.96 + 334,675.50.

We request an express pronouncement on costs, including those of the private prosecution, represented by the State Legal Service.

For all that has been stated, and by virtue of it,

I BEG THE SECOND CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT to regard this text and the document in copy that accompanies it as presented, to be kind enough to admit it and, in its virtue, to regard as presented the indictment document for crimes of sedition, misuse of public funds and grave contempt of court committed by public officials, and to apply the relevant procedure to this Special Case.


EMAIL: aepenal@mjusticia.es
C/. Ayala, 5
28071 MADRID
TEL.: 91 390 47 35/38
 FAX: 91 390 47 40