ERC: "If the king wants to meet with Oriol Junqueras, he will have to head himself to Soto del Real"

The general vice-secretary of internal coordination of ERC, Isaac Peraire, ruled out Monday that the party asked the Supreme Court for a permit so that Oriol Junqueras could visit King Felipe VI at La Zarzuela Palace, as the head of the list of candidates winning yesterday's April 28 election in Catalonia: 

"Should the king wans to meet with Oriol Junqueras... unfortunately now he is still jailed in Soto del Real. If the king wants to see the president of ERC, he must go to Soto del Real to see him then."

He has stated this in Madrid, before the Supreme Court, where he declared this Monday as a witness in the Catalan independence trial at the request of the defence counsel of Junqueras i Romeva.

 

"We ask for and demand their freedom"

Besides throwing this challenge to the king, Peraire said that election results should entail the freedom of elected politicians:

"Today we have more arguments than we had yesterday. We ask for and demand their freedom. The voting result request so."

As for what the party will do for the two politicians in custody to be able to exercise as deputies in the Congress, Peraire said that the executive should decide.

As said, both Junqueras and Romeva have shown "a huge thank-you for both the warmth they received and the votes" that have allowed their electoral victory.

 

Declaration to Marchena  

Before that, Peraire had declared before the court presided by Manuel Marchena, to explain as a witness requested by the defense of Junqueras and Romeva how he lived the events on September 20, 2017.

Peraire, who in addition to being responsible for the ERC executive is also the mayor of Prats de Lluçanès, explained that on that day he went to the house of Josep Maria Jové, as well as to the Ministry of Economy, in Barcelona.

The witness explained how he went to Les Franqueses del Vallès when he learned that the Guardia Civil was at the house of Jové, and how he stayed in the street while the lurch lasted.

As he assured, at no time people who concentrated on the street before the house made it difficult for the work of the judicial entourage, and neither did they difficult their exit:

"We were there to be with our friend, there were people, I did not count how many. They held a positive attitude at all times, staying active, singing, etc., they were concentrated next to the exit of Jové's house. Then I learned that the house had an easy exit on another street."

Raül Romeva and Oriol Junqueras, on Monday during the questions of his lawyer, Andreu Van den Eynde, to the witnesses he asked for

 

To questions from prosecutor Javier Zaragoza, Peraire admitted that there were also tractors at Les Franqueses, but they did not hinder traffic at any moment.

Regarding the concentration in front of the Ministry of Economy, this testimony explained that he arrived there in the afternoon and that he remained almost all the time next to the stage that had been set on the Gran Via street.

From there, as he stated, he could not see the cars of the Guardia Civil or what happened at the entry of the Ministry.

 

Marchena requires the witness not not make political appraisals

Manuel Marchena, on Monday at the Supreme Court, addressing Isaac Peraire

 

When the witness considered that it was "incredible" to witness the arrest of Jové, "an important figure of the government", the president of the court, Manuel Marchena, required him -in 2 occasions-  to solely state the facts:

Peraire: "Yes, what happened was that I saw a high-ranking government figure surrounded by the police, which is the equivalent of seeing an elected deputy of the Congress ..."

Marchena (size): Mr. Isaac, please. Your testimony so far is running with absolute normality. You have correctly answered to the defence counsel of Mr. Junqueras and and Mr. Romera over factual aspects, which are aspects of great value for the Tribunal. The same must happen with the prosecutor."

Marchena: "You should not introduce political assessments about what happened, about the situation or about the strangeness, because at that moment your statement already goes through a path that is not the same as that which can provide a witness."