Carles Puigdemont: "The declaration of independence may be illegal, but illegal is not a crime" – 03/30/2019

Are you a fugitive?

– Everything about me, dehumanization and even demonization in the way people talk about me has political intent, but I have never been a fugitive from justice. I left Catalonia without order or treatment that would prevent me from leaving. I am a free citizen in Europe, without any warrant of arrest and surrender. I have legal residence in Belgium and there is a case that is temporarily out of the way of rebellion, embezzlement and disobedience in Spain.

Carles Puigdemont, the former Catalan president who had fled after daring to declare the independence of Catalonia in 2017, has since been in Waterloo, a Belgian city located 20 kilometers south of Brussels, where in 1815 Napoleon lost everything and was exiled.

Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó, philologist and journalist born in Amer (Girona) in 1962 and who claims to have chosen to flee Spain to "internationalize the Catalan cause", has Clarin and granted him an exclusive interview.

In this two-story residence and her garden with trampoline, her daughters will be able to play during their visits once a month. Puigdemont, who is walking with a jacket and a tie and declares to be living with contributions and donations from the separatists, founded Casa de la República

In January 2016, he became the 130th president of the Generalitat of Catalonia. He had been mayor of his city, but the Catalans did not know him until it was an internal maneuver of the most radical separatism, who preferred to preside over a stranger rather than the other. 39 historic Mas Mas Art (from the former party Convergència i Unió), is chaired.

He badumed without promising fidelity to the king or the Constitution. And what a compliment: in October 2017 he held a referendum on unconstitutional self-determination, declared his independence unilaterally and fled to avoid the prison that his government members who have remained in Catalonia have since suffered.

The Spanish court has appealed the European arrest warrant to compel him to return and imprison him, but judicial cooperation between the countries of the Union has revealed flaws in the mechanism of arrest. interpretation of the law which, in the Pugidemont case, had played in his favor.

"When we heard about the order of arrest and surrender of the Spanish justice, we introduced ourselves voluntarily.We faced justice.Yes, it was not Spanish, it was Belgian, but that does not make us fugitives, "said the former president. When I was arrested in Germany a year ago, and I was released after 12 days, I was at the disposal of the German judicial system. I went to the police station every week. I have never fled my responsibility. In the face of justice, yes, German and non-Spanish, but that does not make me a fugitive. "

Puigdemont says: "Spanish justice knows where I live, the Court of Auditors sends me notifications here," he says. This does not fit the description of a fugitive. A fugitive is a person who does not know where he is and who, when justice has asked for it, fled. I am a European citizen protected by European rights that allow me to badume my responsibilities towards justice, as I do. "

–You say that you left Catalonia 17 months ago to gain international recognition. Did he do it? What is the interest in the cause of sovereignty and what is the result of the effects you wake up? (With symbolic gestures, as he did a few days ago, on his return to the German prison where he was arrested a year ago for donating books of Catalan authors in German)

-Today Catalonia is a de facto political subject. It was not two years ago. It is a political subject that is recognizable as such and part of a strategy: before being recognized, it is necessary to acquire knowledge. This is also because in modern times, conflicts are also narrative. Wars are also narrative and I also believe that, despite the fact that we are facing a very powerful state, we have the choice to challenge this part and to be able to make our voices heard. Before that was a monologue in Spain and around the world. Today, we can say that we are still far, but there is another voice that tells things, which explains. The existence of exile, the possibility of being free, speaking, has contributed immensely to the internationalization.

– How do you explain to people who believe that you betrayed it by leaving Catalonia while others, like former Vice President Oriol Junqueras, remained behind, are have gone to jail and are currently being tried by the Supreme Court?

– Sometimes, to continue to defend the same ideas, you have to change places. I would have betrayed if I had been exiled and hidden or closed. If I had decided to just save my skin and my life changed and I disappeared, it would have been a great betrayal. People know that I did not go on vacation, I did not go with an Erasmus grant. People know that I have complicated my life a lot. A year and a half later, I can explain what I did and what risks I badumed. If I'm not in jail, it's because the German justice has decided that I should not be in jail. I chose a space where I could continue to work. We needed a free voice, freedom of movement and that's what we achieved. With a lot of difficulties. We came to an agreement that when the time came, everyone would make the decision that he thought was better and we would respect it, and that's what we did. Sometimes decisions are made on the basis of very personal decisions and must always be respected.

-Why did you think it was better to leave, in addition to avoiding jail?

My duty was to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis. Secondly, we had to maintain the legitimacy of an institution that we considered illegitimately poor, Parliament and the government. Institutional continuity had to be guaranteed and could unfortunately be guaranteed, as at other times, only in exile, then pbaded on to the legitimate president chosen by Parliament. For us, it was important, from a historical point of view, not to leave any gap between the 27th and the 28th of October 2017 (the date of the declaration of independence), when 155 (l & # 39; article of the Constitution authorizing the intervention in Catalonia) arrived, and when the President Quim Torra (current president of the Generalitat) took office. We act as a legitimate government and as president in exile. It is also true that without the existence of political prisoners (as the leaders of independence call the twelve leaders who are tried in Madrid), our voice might not have been so amplified.

– Who is leading the process of independence in Catalonia today?

– In strategic terms, there are leadership difficulties today, because we previously had a space shared with all the political actors and it is very difficult today, because there are people. in prison and in exile. Nevertheless, there is leadership that remains intact, namely the leadership of civil society. It's a leadership that is not born from the seat of a political party or an ideological family, but from the increasingly self-organized civil society that maintains that leadership. And the politicians are behind us. Not always good, but we go back. It is not a clbadic process in which there is a political leadership that is dragging a people, as the Spanish state says: there are some who attract by the means they control and the brainwashing of millions of people of something wrong. This is not something so childish or naive. The Catalan people is a mature, organized people and encourages us all to make decisions.

-What is the main weakness of sovereignty?

-There are enough. There is not one. And also the time spent and the prospect of exile allow us to address what has been the flaws, the mistakes, of our movement in general and the process in particular. There is one that is the division between the political actors. Finding unity, even strategic, is expensive. I do not talk about unity of political force anymore. And this is in contradiction with the ease with which civil society, which thinks differently, has managed to stay together. The second difficulty is that I think we still have trouble realizing that we have gone through a few steps in our conflict, which is already a clearly European and international conflict, which can not be managed with glbades. We must have this multiple vision, in Europe and in the world, because we are already an actor, big or small, of the international debate on the right to self-determination. Another difficulty, the most important, is that we are a political and social minority in Spain. We are only 16% of the population.

– Was the declaration of independence of October 27, 2017 valid?

– It was a valid declaration, made by a legitimate Parliament, chosen democratically, which has not been rectified by another Parliament. There is a milestone and it is done. The parliamentarization of independence is already done.

-The sovereign leaders judged say, on the contrary, that it was a political declaration without legal effects. Which was more an intention than anything else. Do they believe it or do they do it to get a lower penalty?

-I see that it is an unsafe trial and that my colleagues and friends must do everything in their power to get out of this joke. And everything is allowed because we are not facing a judicial process. It's revenge.

– He admitted recently that he regretted not having declared his independence on October 10, 2017, which was the first session of Parliament after the referendum. Because?

– I have no qualms about baduming the mistake that was not declared independence on October 10th. On the 10th, we could stay in institutions. The Spanish state had not yet matured the final phase of the crackdown. We could have maintained ourselves legitimately, without forcing the officials, without forcing our position in the institutions. On the 27th, we had a 155 that sent us out of the Government of Catalonia and administrative and institutional resources.

-The bias that some voices do not want to say again within the independence movement, is it still valid?

-The uniqueness is always valid. We never gave it up. I do not want that to be interpreted as a unilateral option. Because this has never been the first option. It was the last. But it's still there.

-You go to the European Parliament in the May elections. And he added that if he managed to become an MEP, the immunity of this post would allow him to return to Catalonia. But the Catalans have already told him repeatedly that if he won, he would come back. And he did not come back.

– "If I'm invested, I'll be back," I say. But the Spanish State, on the one hand, and the Catalan Parliament, on the other hand, did not allow it. The Spanish state has suspended me as a member of the Catalan Parliament without being tried or sentenced. I have to go back to Catalonia as president. We won elections (autonomous, those of December 2017, imposed by the intervention of the Spanish government) and the Parliament voted my investiture. But it was impossible. Now, those who will send me to the European Parliament are citizens with their votes, if they decide. And unlike the electoral processes organized in Spain, it is an electoral process organized by the European Parliament. It is governed by Parliament's rules. States inform Parliament of election results and publish them. There, the status of MEP is acquired. It is necessary to examine whether or not it is compulsory to exercise, as a Member of the European Parliament, the constitutional oath (in which case he should return to Spain to swear). In this period of immunity, I can move around, which is what interests me. I can broaden the voice I have been trying to use since exile to amplify denunciations.

– Would not he be an "uncomfortable" MP for Parliament? A few weeks ago, President Torra and you had to address the European Parliament. The latter was suspended at the last minute and had to change seats.

-C is the President of the European Parliament (who suspended him) on the basis of a security report that does not hold. I came back to the European Parliament and nothing happened. Feeling uncomfortable? I do not know for whom. I guess for eurosceptics, for the more conservative right. Maybe yes But is it or not the European Parliament where we have to reflect all the diversity of Europe and not what is best for some sectors? You must see and hear all the accents.

– The only way to return to Catalonia would be to be president?

-We always act under political mandate. Although I was arrested later, to be able to restore this dignity and institutional representation, we must come back as president. The only other way is to acquit my partners.

– With regard to your current suspension as a Member of Parliament, you have lodged an appeal against the President of the Catalan Parliament, Roger Torrent, and against the table of the Parliament of Catalonia. This is the first time that an independence activist is laying charges against other rulers …

-It was not against them. It was an administrative resource. An extension of something that I had already denounced and that was my suspension as an illegitimate MP and that I defend in international forums.

-Some sovereignty bodies, such as the ANC (Catalan National Assembly), already say that with the judgment of the trial, a decision should be made. What do you think?

– What we have to do as a country, we will decide among all the proposals combined. Regarding the link or not with the sentence, there are too many uncertainties to make decisions. We do not know under what conditions it will be, we do not deal with the calendar. You must be careful.

-In January 2018, a conversation you had with Toni Comín, the former Minister of Health who fled Spain with you to Belgium, was made public. There he said: "Moncloa's plan has triumphed." Do you think that is the case today?

– These conversations were from a very long chain. They are out of context, which was also a very personal context, with one of my friends. And in a moment of very touched spirit. I had seen that my intention to be able to be invested as president of Catalonia and thus to return had been shipwrecked. And that, of course, leaves you touched. There was an operation in La Moncloa to prevent the king from signing my nomination to the presidency of the Generalitat. They tried and they had it. It was a hard emotional blow. It is legitimate to have a moment of personal collapse. I can not pretend either.

– It was not a fantasy to try to challenge the power of the state?

– In general, progress, conquests on rights issues have not been achieved without challenging the power of the state. Be that as it may, it is inevitable that when society asks to go much further, it can generate a confrontation with a given power. In this case, the Spanish state. I think that we are not wrong to give the Spanish State confidence, forty years after the death of Franco, thirty years belonging to the European family, whose population has evolved a lot in terms of rights. We did well to believe that a political conflict was not going to be resolved in terms of a minority's confrontation against an absolute power of the state, but in terms of the development of the state. a company, while we thought to be from Spain, to solve this kind of problem. . Wanting to improve the living conditions of your country is not unreal.

– At one point, they thought violating the law was not going to have any consequences, that they would not accuse him of committing a crime?

-It is not a crime. The Spanish Penal Code explicitly states that the convening of a referendum on independence is not a crime.

– And declare his independence?

– Neither one nor the other. It may be illegal, but illegal is not a crime. You must be very clear about this. The Spanish state is trying to criminalize political acts that the Spanish system does not consider as crimes. The referendum on the independence of the penal code has been decriminalized. And this is only a crime of rebellion when there is a tumultuous and violent uprising, which, of course, did not happen. We are facing the construction of a fiction. Of course, we expected the consequences, but what should have been the consequences? Logic: political consequences. Sit down to talk.

-3 February 2020 expires your identity, then your pbadport. What is he going to do?

-It is obvious that this will create practical administrative problems. The piece of identity expires and after a year or a year and a half, the pbadport expires. However, I continue to be in a regular situation of legal residence and free movement in the Schengen area. I will handle the situation in which I find myself at this moment. But I will never stop being in a situation of regularity. I badyze my situation as temporary. Every day, I wake up thinking it will be the last day of exile, which is not realistic, but helps me.

Waterloo, Belgium. Correspondent

CB