The Prosecutor's Office confirms the accusation of rebellion against pro-independence leaders

The Prosecutor's Office maintains the accusation for rebellion against the independence leaders tried at the Supreme Court, considering that permitted violence directed by them has been proven.

The State Prosecutor General's Office has not only finalized its conclusions on Wednesday "without any substantial modification", but it has also added, as the prosecutor Jaime Moreno stated, a "more complete and richer wording". The prosecution is requesting 25 years of prison for the Deputy Prime Minister of the Catalan Government Oriol Junqueras for the crime of rebellion, 17 years for the ex-president of the Parliament Carme Forcadell and 16 for the five former deputies who are in prison -Joaquim Forn, Jordi Turull, Raül Romeva, Josep Rull and Dolors Bassa. He also asks for 17 years for Jordi Cuixart and Jordi Sànchez.

In addition, the Prosecutor's Office asks independence leaders not to obtain the third degree, and therefore, leave prison until half of a hypothetical sentence is served. This demand is based on section 36.2 of the Criminal Code.

The office of the public prosecutor has made another modification, only this time, in reference to the members of the bureau of the Catalan Parliament that had to be judged before the Supreme Court, with the argument that the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia has already been declared competent to judge them.

In any case, there was an error in the prosecution's brief in the sentences requested for Jordi Cuixart and Jordi Sànchez, since it specified a penalty of 18 years instead of the corresponding 17 for both of them, and reduced from 17 to 16 years the sentence requested for Carme Forcadell. The Prosecutor's Office has already admitted that it was indeed a mistake.

As it already justified when the petitions for the trial against the independence process were made public on last November, the prosecution applies to them the first, fifth and seventh sections of article 472 of the Criminal Code, as well as the first one of article 473, defining the defendants as "promoters and/or main leaders" of the alleged rebellion. It also requests the "absolute disqualification" of all of them for the same years of the request for imprisonment, in application of article 478.

The Attorney's General Office also maintains its accusations

The Attorney's General Office maintains the crime of sedition for the defendants.This is an offense considered as ‘minor' in the Penal Code in its 22nd section, dedicated to crimes against public order. Sentences up to 15 years in prison are contemplated for this offence, as well as the disqualification of their public positions. This crime penalizes those who rise publicly and "tumultuously" with the objective of preventing law enforcement, either by force or by non-legally considered ways. It also punishes any authority  preventing from the compliance of administrative or judicial decisions.

On the other hand, the popular accusation of Vox maintains the accusations for the majority of pro-independence leaders, except for Santi Vila, to whom they retired the accusation for the offences of criminal organization and misuse of public funds.
 

The defenses ask for a petition for acquittal

The defenses are explaining their conclusions. All of them maintain the petition for acquittal and some of them will present non-substantial modifications.
 

"Generalized uprising, stressed by acts of force, aggression and violence"

The prosecution considers Junqueras to be the maximum responsible for a "generalized uprising, punctuated by acts of force, aggression and violence," which made the king respond with the televised speech of October 3.

Forn is also accused for the crime of rebellion, but in a different degree, that of subaltern commanders, for which the penalty requested is 16 years, adding the crime of misuse of public funds.

As for former deputies Raül Romeva, Jordi Turull, Josep Rull and Dolors Bassa, the prosecution argues that they executed an agreed plan, fully aware of the illegality of the process. In the brief of conclusions, they describe how Romeva, Rull and Turull participated in meetings where the process of independence and the construction of a state of their own were discussed.

In reference to October 1, he adds that they made public calls to vote, being aware that there was a "very high probability that violent acts would take place".