The Prosecutor’s Office defends that Bildu is a “democratic” party

The Prosecutor’s Office has refused to initiate a process of illegalization against the Bildu party, as several associations and some political leaders such as the president of Madrid, Isabel Díaz Ayuso, are claiming, after the controversy generated after learning that the formation had introduced into its lists several ETA convicts with blood crimes.

A report, signed by the Prosecutor of the Chief Chamber of the Technical Secretariat, Ana García León, and by the Chamber Prosecutor of the Contentious-Administrative Section of the Supreme Court Prosecutor’s Office, Antonio Narváez, concludes that “in view of his activity, the legality of its means and the compatibility of its aims with democratic principles, Euskal Herria Bildu constitutes a democratic political formation and, therefore, the possibility of requesting the procedure of declaration of illegality must be rejected”.

According to the prosecutors, there are “minimally rational indications” of any of the behaviors provided for in the law on political parties “that allow us to assess the facts referred to.”

In this case, this report, which has the approval of the State Attorney General, Álvaro García, responds to the request of a victims’ association Dignidad y Justicia. This position is added to the one already reflected yesterday by the Prosecutor’s Office of the National Court, which also refused to initiate a process of illegalization through criminal proceedings, requested by the same association, since there was no indication of a crime in the arguments.

According to the prosecutors’ report, the law does not establish a cause for the illegalization of political parties due to the fact that they hold certain political positions, but because their activity violates democratic principles, because with that same activity they seek to deteriorate or destroy the regime of freedoms or make it impossible or eliminate the democratic system.

The document states that ETA is dissolved, no attacks have been committed since 2011, “which is another element to assess when deciding whether to challenge candidacies or exclude some of their members.”

In addition, it maintains that the people who once belonged to that organization and arrived, as is the case of these 44 people who have been included in the lists, “commit criminal acts in their name and interest, who have already served their sentences and that there is no evidence accredited by objective evidence that shows any intention to return to using violence as an instrument at the service of their political goals and ideals, there is no reason to challenge those candidacies or request the exclusion of some of the members of those”.