Vox goes after three senior judges and court clerk
It can't be both. Vox can't have been notified of the time of the hearing in Seville about Abascal's controversial rally in Spanish North Africa and not have been notified of that hearing at the same time. Either the clerk at the Regional High Court in Andalusia informed the party's solicitor or she didn't. Either, and it seems outrageous to even be writing this, a solicitor for the third largest political party in Spain or the clerk of the court at the Regional High Court in Andalusia is not telling the truth. One of them is wrong. One of them is lying in a statement they have made. Vox believes it is convenient to question the word of the court.
And there are now official legal statements on both sides. The clerk of the court to her judges in Seville, and Vox's solicitor there in a sworn statement that is now part of a criminal complaint at the Supreme Court of the Kingdom of Spain. The Supreme Court confirmed today that the complaint has been filed correctly. Having read the court rulings and Vox's complaint, the core of the issue appears to be what information was communicated in a phone call at around 10 a.m. on Monday, May 24. Unless it was recorded, which is very unlikely, the content of that conversation is the word of the clerk against the word of the solicitor.
The court in Andalusia ruled last week, against a Vox appeal to annul the hearing, that the "irrefutable proof" the party was notified in time was the fact that documents were also requested during the call. The party's solicitor turned up at 11:30 a.m. (30 minutes before the injunction hearing) with those documents. He insists he was not told about the time of the hearing either during the call or in person when he turned up with the documents.
Is it plausible the senior clerk or staff at a regionl high court did inform the solicitor who had requested an urgent injunction hearing about the documents he needed to provide but did not inform him of the time of that hearing, that very morning, on the phone and then 90 minutes later in person? Futhermore, is it plausible the solicitor himself, knowing he had requested an urgent hearing for a matter on fudamental rights that was taking place that very day, did not ask court staff what time his hearing had been scheduled for?
Vox has not suggested a motivation for why the clerk might not have done what they accuse her of not doing.
The party has never been shy about filing all sorts of criminal complaints against political rivals or when it sees an opportunity to make a political point in a media friendly way but it is rare, perhaps even unheard of, for them to go after the judges themselves. It now wants three senior judges and the clerk of the court in Seville investigated for abuse of authority. Either this is a gigantic waste of court time to try to win the political narrative, or a high court in Andalusia actually did something wrong that perhaps affected their fundamental right to protest in Ceuta on Monday, May 24, 2021. Now we will have to wait for the Supreme Court's response.
Get the articles straight in your email inbox. In English and/or Spanish. No ads, no spam, just reporting and analysis. Readers guarantee this journalism. Join them.