Spy activists ask Constitutional Court to impose ‘legal and ethical restrictions’ on police infiltrators

The case of infiltrated policemen reached the Constitutional Court. The first activists turned to the guarantee body after the refusal of ordinary courts to investigate the police espionage to which they were subjected. In the appeal, the women demand from the employees “legal and ethical restrictions on the actions of the police”, because the activities of the underground policemen are not subject to judicial control, unlike the underground policemen.

The appeal came after a Barcelona court confirmed the filing of his complaint without even investigating it. The blanket closure contradicts past reprimands by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) for Spain’s judiciary for failing to investigate complaints of ill-treatment or torture. “There is a lack of effective investigation of some very serious events,” complained the applicants’ lawyer, Mireia Salazar of the Irídia Center.

Both the investigating judge, the Barcelona court and the prosecutor’s office ruled out that the police infiltration of Barcelona’s social and anarchist movements constituted a crime of torture or against moral integrity. The judges also refused to investigate whether the fact that he gave up his status as a police officer to have sex with five female activists could constitute a crime of sexual violence.

The activists’ appeal claims that police intrusion without judicial review, as happened in the cases of anarchists from Barcelona, ​​independents from Girona or social movements in Madrid and Valencia, clearly violates the right to privacy, which would force judges to conduct a thorough investigation. But this did not happen.

In the case of the Barcelona activists, the fact of sexual relations is added, which, according to them, allowed the infiltrated agents “to gain access to intimate personal information and collective political information, with the subsequent instrumentalization and objectification and infringement of their bodily sovereignty. , their sexual freedom, their intimacy and their moral integrity.”

Concealing her identity as a police officer for sex “put the women at a disadvantage, which the agent took advantage of,” the appeal said. According to the women’s defence, the agent had “cover” from the Home Office without which “he would not have been able to present a false identity with a degree of sophistication sufficient to deceive these women”.

The refusal of the courts to consider their complaint, the defense adds, is a violation of the activists’ right to effective judicial protection, which is added to their rights to physical and moral integrity, prohibition of torture and degrading treatment, and freedom of assembly and association.

Check Also

League of Legends ‘owners’ want to sue US for listing them as companies linked to Chinese military

Chinese tech giant Tencent, the parent company of developers like Riot Games (behind games like …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *