Supreme Court judge lifts detention orders for Puigdemont and co-accused
Judge Pablo Llarena of the Supreme Court has permanently cancelled the national arrest warrants for Carles Puigdemont, Antoni Comín and Lluis Puig, citing the Constitutional Court’s amnesty ruling.
Supreme Court instructor Pablo Llarena formally withdrew the national detention warrants for Carles Puigdemont, Antoni Comín and Lluis Puig, declaring them ineffective in light of the Constitutional Court’s recent amnesty decision. While Llarena expressed disagreement with the Constitutional Court’s arguments, he affirmed his duty to apply its doctrinal guidance under article 5.1 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary. He clarified that the removal does not terminate the criminal case, which will continue before the Supreme Court’s relevant chamber.
Llarena argued that maintaining the orders would conflict with the constitutional interpretation now binding on all courts. The judge also criticized the language used by the Constitutional Court in its judgment, but said the disagreement does not delay compliance.
Why it matters
The decision ends the active arrest warrants for prominent Catalan leaders, affecting ongoing legal and political dynamics in Spain.
How the sides frame it
MODERATE AGREEMENTLeft-leaning and centrist outlets present the ruling as a straightforward legal clarification and emphasize the Supreme Court’s doctrine, while right-leaning coverage highlights the judge’s clash with the Constitutional Court and uses charged language to portray the decision as a contentious rebuke.
LEFT
Frames the decision as a rightful legal correction that upholds the Supreme Court’s doctrine and rejects the Vox challenge, while criticizing the Constitutional Court’s harsh language.
RIGHT
Portrays the ruling as a heated dispute, emphasizing the judge’s criticism of the Constitutional Court’s language and framing the move as a bold rebuke.
The left emphasises
- the Supreme Court’s doctrine must be applied
- the Constitutional Court’s ruling lacked "measure" and was overly harsh
- rejection of the Vox popular-prosecution challenge
The right emphasises
- the judge’s disagreement with the Constitutional Court’s arguments
- the criticism of the Constitutional Court’s language as "rotundidad" and "censura"
- the need to align with the constitutional interpretation now binding on all courts
In this story
Related stories
2 in this thread