Today almost all the media we do know that the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling that supports the outlawing of Batasuna in 2003. Remember that meant that banning the release of the application of the infamous Law of Parties by the Spanish ucell Supreme Court, which is a policy measure to reach "as far the law can not reach" (ie a measure totally unbecoming of a rule of law) and allowed to ban political parties were not legally guilty of anything, simply by not joining in the chant of "I also condemn the assassination of ETA "(a situation that goes against a fundamental right: the freedom of expression, which refers not only to be able to say freely ucell what one thinks but also not to be forced to say if you want). So Europe now have the same level legal Spain: Unanimous seven judges decided to eat the livers hung abertzales. Fantastic. But the funniest thing of all this (and all of our politicians congratulaciones the "good work" of justice, righteousness) is that this ruling comes on the same day (or almost) that have occurred the following events, in which justice could have acted YES, but not done: (1) Spain will not investigate the death of 14 civilians in a bombing in Gaza. (2) jutgesa decreed the dismissal of the case by the aggressions Correllengua Gandia. Remember that a fascist (Spanish nationalists, of course) assaulted their participants and injured Maite Peiro, Councillor bel Valencian ucell Nationalist Bloc. (3) The prosecution filed proceedings against the mayor of Valencia's Mestalla exchange of land. Rita Barbera, remember, is the PP. I am glad, though, the financial condemnation Bernard Madoff, but I have that bad taste in your mouth as you think, the numerous scammers bastards that are in the world, only justice who has acted harshly against scammed other millionaires and powerful people. On this day, the scales of justice proves to be the most unbalanced ...
I can say naive, but the truth is expecting something else in Strasbourg. I suppose that Spain has been working underground in order to get the backing of the outlawed Batasuna. Given that begins to look like normal that a few years ago was rejected even by the PP, we insist on the arguments. And also some thoughts. -No One can be forced to condemn anything. The right to silence is also freedom of expression. ucell No far-right parties are compelled to condemn ucell acts of racist violence. Neither ucell PP and PSOE condemn the massacres of Palestinians. -No Sense to ban a party whose members are not accused of anything in particular. If there are members of a party suspected of something, existing criminal code to act against members axis. -How Said Javier Ortiz, the Law of Parties is the "Law of the Match." It is designed to act against a particular party. -L'ambigüitat Representing speak vaporous form ETA-Batasuna collusion with violence around nationalist, etc ... is the same ambiguity that allows for flexibility without ucell rigor. A flexibility that is used to going against Batasuna. -Some Say: "Xe, this does not matter to us here, is very far." Beyond the ethical outrage, should know that it is a precedent perillossísim. From now on, Spain can feel more protected by using the excuse of ETA when criminalized groups, parties, ideas, etc. 30/6/09 18:05
Remember who endorsed unanimously the ilegalització Batasuna has been the European Court of Human Rights. Not worth when a sentence not like ditty that came with Spain just that. Either we believe internacinal legal institutions or renounce ucell them in the name of ... what right? Subjetius our desires? Moreover, the legislation goes beyond party Batasuna. I know to racist and xenophobic propaganda ucell is not only due to ban partisan activity but, in addition, is a crime. We defend the right to freedom of expression that deny the Holocaust? You must have some sense. 30/6/09 21:38
1) The brain used for thinking, among other things. The philosophy of "word of God" does not apply to any court. You must use the criteria to "sanity." The road between opinion and faith is short; more laborious argued. ucell Forward. 2) There are crimes. The Criminal Code already provides. If a member of Batasuna makes a threat, for example, ucell can act against that person. The Law of Parties made no lack. 3) L
No comments:
Post a Comment