In the early 90s, the Spanish government decided to internationalize the political conflict between the Spanish State and the Basque Country, in terms of repression.
Aided by an international context where, following the collapse of the Eastern Bloc, there was going to be a backlash regarding human rights throughout the world, the arrests of Basques began in various countries such as Mexico (1990), Uruguay (1992), Nicaragua (1993), etc. This internationalization of repression reached its high point during the second term in government of the conservative PP (2000-2004). At the time, the infamous “Agreement for Liberties and Against Terrorism” (a pact which has turned out to be a failure, as did all the previous agreements of this kind; i.e. aimed at the same unattainable objective: to terminate the struggle for independence in our country) stated that the international dimension was one of the basic pillars of the struggle against the independence movement.
It is interesting to see how during the last three years, when much progress has been made in terms of clarifying the key issues for conflict resolution, the PP has constantly protested against this progress, accusing the PSOE of furthering the aims of the Basque Left-wing Independence Movement by making certain moves in the international arena (the European Parliament resolution, among other examples). It is interesting because it was the PP itself who did the most to internationalize the conflict, both in Europe and in the American continent. They achieved this by pushing for all kinds of new repressive measures in the EU, demanding statements condemning armed actions by ETA at every international meeting and event, persecuting Basque exiles throughout the world by every means available, etc.
If there has been a political actor that has really helped to make the Basque struggle known around the world (which is also an aim of the Basque Independence Movement, with a view to raise support for a true and definitive conflict resolution process) it has undoubtedly been the Spanish Popular Party – with the support, as usual, of the PSOE.
Repression as an element of internationalization
It is clear that repression against Basques has been extended to many countries over recent years. It has also expanded to affect people who were often living lives with nothing to do with politics, because there was a 25 year-old charge against them, or simply because there was a need –there still is- for a photograph of repression bearing fruit outside the Spanish borders. Indeed, every time a Basque is extradited to Spain from another country, there is a photograph of that person being led off the plane by the police in every newspaper, just to prove that there is no safe haven for Basque exiles anywhere in the world.
Clearly, this repression has caused much damage to many Basque people and families. They have seen their lives being shattered by the cruel revenge of State repression against dissidence. Nevertheless, the force of this repression has often rebounded against the State. This was especially the case when Basque exiles imprisoned in countries around the world have won their cases and regained their freedom (4 cases in Mexico, the cases in Uruguay, Argentina, Belgium, Portugal and even in France), or when, in hard fought court cases, the alleged Spanish democracy has been shown in a true light (verdicts in which, despite granting extradition, the Spanish judicial system is severely criticized, in Germany, the Netherlands…).
This is why, over recent years, Bilateral Extradition Agreements have been established with most countries in America, and why, even within the European Union, they have managed to change the former extradition procedure to the European handover procedure, or European Arrest Warrant.
The European Arrest Warrant
As has been insistently pointed out, the European Arrest Warrant puts extreme limits to a detainee’s right to a defence. Despite the fact that it has been possible to slow down the process of handing over Basques to the Spanish State from Belgium and France, the truth is that the European Arrest Warrant has brought a fundamental change to international arrests by placing the responsibility (the obligation, almost) to hand over the detainee on the country where the arrest takes place, due to a mistaken concept of cooperation or reciprocity between states.
In any case, if the defence counsel’s right to use all the legal instruments in its power is upheld at these European Arrest Warrant trials, repression can become a boomerang against the Spanish State. We have recently seen an instance of this at Westminster Magistrate’s Court, where, throughout the sessions, rather than analysing the defendants’ actions, the lack of democracy in the Spanish State and in its appalling judiciary has been brought to light. At the end of the day, even if the initial decision was to hand over the detainees, the verdict is a good example of the juggling efforts foreign courts have to carry out in order to grant the warrant.
Unfortunately, there are many cases when the Spanish courts invent, lie about or reinterpret actions by Basque citizens, all in order to fit their activities within what they define as terrorism (which, incidentally, is defined one way today and tomorrow may turn out to have a broader definition –see the verdict against he Basque youth organization SEGI, etc.). In the case of the Sheffield Three, the European Arrest Warrant is simply a scandal, and the lack of legal bases so obvious that the prosecutor in charge of defending the interests of the State has had no other option but to resort to the argument that there should be a measure of trust towards the human rights situation in another EU country.
Every time a Basque is arrested outside our country (apart from the arrests that take place in the two occupying countries –France and Spain) this becomes a source of internationalization of the conflict. The lack of democracy in the Spanish State, its ludicrous legal and judicial system, all come into the picture. The cases become a mirror in which the monster of repression is seen by Europe and the world in its true shape. Furthermore, the fundamental issue of the denial of our People’s democratic right to discuss and decide is clearly seen, as well as the use of brute force to deny the Basque Country its freedom.
This antidemocratic Spanish system can no longer fool anyone, and the entire battery of repression deployed on the international level (whatever the new-fangled instruments they decorate it with) is more often than not a boomerang that turns back against the monster.
It is interesting to see how during the last three years, when much progress has been made in terms of clarifying the key issues for conflict resolution, the PP has constantly protested against this progress, accusing the PSOE of furthering the aims of the Basque Left-wing Independence Movement by making certain moves in the international arena (the European Parliament resolution, among other examples). It is interesting because it was the PP itself who did the most to internationalize the conflict, both in Europe and in the American continent. They achieved this by pushing for all kinds of new repressive measures in the EU, demanding statements condemning armed actions by ETA at every international meeting and event, persecuting Basque exiles throughout the world by every means available, etc.
If there has been a political actor that has really helped to make the Basque struggle known around the world (which is also an aim of the Basque Independence Movement, with a view to raise support for a true and definitive conflict resolution process) it has undoubtedly been the Spanish Popular Party – with the support, as usual, of the PSOE.
Repression as an element of internationalization
It is clear that repression against Basques has been extended to many countries over recent years. It has also expanded to affect people who were often living lives with nothing to do with politics, because there was a 25 year-old charge against them, or simply because there was a need –there still is- for a photograph of repression bearing fruit outside the Spanish borders. Indeed, every time a Basque is extradited to Spain from another country, there is a photograph of that person being led off the plane by the police in every newspaper, just to prove that there is no safe haven for Basque exiles anywhere in the world.
Clearly, this repression has caused much damage to many Basque people and families. They have seen their lives being shattered by the cruel revenge of State repression against dissidence. Nevertheless, the force of this repression has often rebounded against the State. This was especially the case when Basque exiles imprisoned in countries around the world have won their cases and regained their freedom (4 cases in Mexico, the cases in Uruguay, Argentina, Belgium, Portugal and even in France), or when, in hard fought court cases, the alleged Spanish democracy has been shown in a true light (verdicts in which, despite granting extradition, the Spanish judicial system is severely criticized, in Germany, the Netherlands…).
This is why, over recent years, Bilateral Extradition Agreements have been established with most countries in America, and why, even within the European Union, they have managed to change the former extradition procedure to the European handover procedure, or European Arrest Warrant.
The European Arrest Warrant
As has been insistently pointed out, the European Arrest Warrant puts extreme limits to a detainee’s right to a defence. Despite the fact that it has been possible to slow down the process of handing over Basques to the Spanish State from Belgium and France, the truth is that the European Arrest Warrant has brought a fundamental change to international arrests by placing the responsibility (the obligation, almost) to hand over the detainee on the country where the arrest takes place, due to a mistaken concept of cooperation or reciprocity between states.
In any case, if the defence counsel’s right to use all the legal instruments in its power is upheld at these European Arrest Warrant trials, repression can become a boomerang against the Spanish State. We have recently seen an instance of this at Westminster Magistrate’s Court, where, throughout the sessions, rather than analysing the defendants’ actions, the lack of democracy in the Spanish State and in its appalling judiciary has been brought to light. At the end of the day, even if the initial decision was to hand over the detainees, the verdict is a good example of the juggling efforts foreign courts have to carry out in order to grant the warrant.
Unfortunately, there are many cases when the Spanish courts invent, lie about or reinterpret actions by Basque citizens, all in order to fit their activities within what they define as terrorism (which, incidentally, is defined one way today and tomorrow may turn out to have a broader definition –see the verdict against he Basque youth organization SEGI, etc.). In the case of the Sheffield Three, the European Arrest Warrant is simply a scandal, and the lack of legal bases so obvious that the prosecutor in charge of defending the interests of the State has had no other option but to resort to the argument that there should be a measure of trust towards the human rights situation in another EU country.
Every time a Basque is arrested outside our country (apart from the arrests that take place in the two occupying countries –France and Spain) this becomes a source of internationalization of the conflict. The lack of democracy in the Spanish State, its ludicrous legal and judicial system, all come into the picture. The cases become a mirror in which the monster of repression is seen by Europe and the world in its true shape. Furthermore, the fundamental issue of the denial of our People’s democratic right to discuss and decide is clearly seen, as well as the use of brute force to deny the Basque Country its freedom.
This antidemocratic Spanish system can no longer fool anyone, and the entire battery of repression deployed on the international level (whatever the new-fangled instruments they decorate it with) is more often than not a boomerang that turns back against the monster.
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Display the following 5 comments