Posted on: July 11, 2020 Posted by: admin Comments: 0

The National Court has agreed this Thursday to open an oral trial against Mohamed Houli Chemal , Driss Oukabir and Said Ben Iazza , the three alleged members of the terrorist cell that committed the attacks in Catalonia on August 17 and 18, 2017.

In the car, the Board confirms the conclusion of the summary for crimes that included the examining magistrate in his car processing and constituted a terrorist organization, manufacture, possession and storage of explosives and crime havoc attempted, without prejudice , indicates the court in its resolution, of its determination in the writings of conclusions, of consummate terrorist ravages and attempted murders or terrorist injuries by the events of Alcanar .

Several of the private and two popular accusations had asked the court to order the investigating judge to extend the complaint to the three members of the cell for the victims of the attacks in Barcelona and Cambrils.

The Chamber rejects this point and explains that when the investigation ends, the accusatory principle prevails and the necessary impartiality of the sentencing chamber must be guaranteed, hence, except for clamorous omissions of attributable facts, “the power to order the prosecution should not be used or the extension of the same by attributing to the accused of facts that were not imputed to them in the court order. ”

COURT ARGUMENTS
“The Chamber will not order the prosecution of Mohamed Houli Chemlal and Driss Oukabir for the events in Barcelona on the afternoon of August 17, 2017, nor for those that occurred in Cambrils early on August 18, 2017, which It does not exclude that, both in the search for material truth, and in order to repair the victims and, furthermore, to establish the participation that the accused may have had in the other facts included in the factum of the indictment. of the accusing parties understand them, parts that are not linked by the criminal legal classification. ”

“The prohibition of including in the written statement of conclusions facts that have not been imputed to the accused is a presupposition of legitimacy for the prosecution, but this does not lead to the requirement of a factual accuracy between the incriminating decision and the accusation , since an extension in the historical account of the accusation brief in relation to the description of the facts contained in the indictment does not always imply a substantial motivation for the purposes of the accusatory principle and the correlative right of defense “, emphasize the magistrates Alfonso Guevara , Carolina Riusy and Carlos Fraile .

In addition, the court recalls that the indictment expressly excludes by the instructor the participation of the accused in the events that occurred in Barcelona or Cambrils. The judges add that if they ordered to prosecute or extend the prosecution, they would be evaluating even provisionally the rational indications of criminality against a certain person or persons, which would make them lose the necessary impartiality.

THE EXPLOSION IN ALCANAR
However, the Chamber argues that the prohibition to include in the written statement of conclusions facts that have not been imputed to the accused does not lead to the requirement of factual accuracy between the incriminating decision and the accusation.

For this reason, as long as the qualifications are not on facts not imputed, they can vary and understand possible contests, so the court collects the different alternatives of the accusations, among them the possible harmful, personal and material consequences of the explosion of the stored material. in the house of Alcanar that could suppose the existence of a contest of crimes as several of the personal accusations understand.

In the same sense, the order also explains the possibility that the accusations impute Said Ben Iazza for integration or simple collaboration in his writing of conclusions.

Uncategorized

Leave a Comment