Support in Belfast

Supporters of Arturo Villanueva Arteaga hold Basque flags and display placards at Lagonside Court in Belfast, yesterday, April 22nd. Spanish authorities say Northern Ireland police have arrested a man suspected of having links to an outlawed Basque group. The Interior Ministry says police arrested Arturo Villanueva Arteaga, 32, in Belfast on Wednesday on a European arrest warrant. Villanueva is accused of belonging to Haika, a group outlawed in 2007 by Spain as a terrorist organization linked to armed Basque separatist group ETA, something that Spain's D.A. has failed to prove thus violating international law and treaties regarding human rights. This action by Madrid's government is part of an ongoing campaign to force governments around the world to curtail the civil rights of Basque citizens.

.... ... .

Report by EHW

This report comes to us thanks to Euskal Herria Watch:

33/01 Case against Gestoras Pro-Amnistia-Askatasuna

Description of the case

Repression against the Basque People, conducted by the Spanish State and - to a lesser degree- by the French State has been constant in recent years. It is easy to trace a continuous line throughout the last decades that can show us the persistence of torture, massive and arbitrary detentions, a penitentiary policy with terrible consequences, banned associations and organizations, closure of media, outlawing of political parties and total discrimination from public life against a section of the population. To sum up, an exceptional situation that has generated a dangerous scenario of suppression of the most basic political and civil rights, a scenario that can now be seen in all its brutality.

These circumstances have forced hundreds of Basque citizens to create a retaining wall, to confront repression and participate in different civic organisations, human rights organisations, and activist organisations in what has become known as the Amnesty Movement. Without such a movement, the lack of activation of the people and, therefore, of social opposition would have resulted in a total acceptance of the impunity of the structures of the Spanish State. That is why many and varied activities have been channelled through this Movement -conferences, demonstrations, public appeals, contacts with all kinds of political and social agents…- in order to demand a scenario of respect for basic democratic conditions, of enjoyment of basic civil and political rights.

In this context, the organisation Gestoras Pro Amnistía was born three decades ago as the main platform for solidarity with the people that suffered political repression and to campaign against the situation. This association carried out a process in 2002 to converge with the association Koordinaketa, made up of the committees that worked in solidarity with political prisoners in the North of the Basque Country, under French administration. Askatasuna emerged as a result of this process, to carry out these activities in the whole of the Basque Country. In other words: an organization that focuses its activity on the promotion and protection of the human rights of the victims of repression, that fights for the eradication of torture, for the rights of arrested or imprisoned Basque citizens and the overcoming of the causes that are at the origin of State violence.

This task has always been carried out completely within the law and with a continuous public expression of its activities –press conferences, peaceful demonstrations, organisation of debates, conferences, compilation of information and figures of repression, the diffusion of these through reports, publications, public exchange with other social agencies, political parties, trade unions…-. That is why Gestoras Pro Amnistía–Askatasuna have become a reference for the grassroots movement, with a reputation and social recognition and an important capacity for activating Basque society. We could say that this organisation is present in all cities and neighbourhoods throughout the Basque Country, with the participation in its activities of thousands of people.

Police operations

This task and goals mentioned were criminalized and, in fact, suspended after the police operation carried out by the judge at Central Investigation Court nº 5, Baltasar Garzón. On October 31st, 2001, 12 organizers or spokespeople of this organisation were arrested under the accusation of belonging to a terrorist organisation. Juan Mari Olano, its national coordinator was arrested some weeks later in Bayonne –North Basque Country, under French administration- and after a long process, extradited to the Spanish state. All those people were been in pre-trial imprisonment –remand in custody- for the maximum limit allowed by Spanish law in these cases, of four years awaiting trial. The right to be presumed innocent has disappeared; convictions are now served in advance, before any hearing at a trial. They were released under astronomical amounts of money as bail in May and June 2004.

In the context of this operation, a virulent campaign by the media and politicians was implemented against the professional activity of the lawyers that work on cases that can be labelled “political”, under the argument that these lawyers belong to the “prison front” of the armed organisation. Thus, on the morning of October 31st, as the premises and offices of the Gestoras Pro Amnistía were searched, the police entered the offices of lawyers which are registered in the Bar Association of Lawyers in Gipuzkoa and Pamplona respectively. It must be remarked that the judge Baltasar Garzón, who was leading the operation in Bilbao was personally warned of this situation. Nevertheless, the judge took no notice of that information and carried on with the search, with both offices being sealed off and computers and documents belonging to the twelve lawyers that worked there being seized.

The investigation judge later ordered the lifting of the sealing of both offices and the restitution of the confiscated material, after duplicating and copying all the content of the computers and the documents seized during the searches. This is a flagrant violation of the rights of the lawyers to professional secrecy, as well as other guaranties that must be observed in these cases. Lawyer Julen Arzuaga will be subjected to these proceedings because of this illegal action.

On February 5th 2003, in a new raid, five people that worked as spokespersons in the new association Askatasuna were arrested, their homes searched as well as the premises of the association of relatives of political prisoners Etxerat in Bilbao, Hernani and Gasteiz. On February 6th Central Court of Investigation nº 5 took the decision to merge the proceedings into Case 33/01.

These operations have a continuity in the present, as on September 11th 2007 Juan Maria Olano and on October 3rd 2007 Ohiana Agirre, also spokespersons of Askatasuna were been arrested and jailed for “reiteration in their public activity as representatives of Askatasuna”. Olano will be released in early March 2008. Meanwhile, Ohiana Agirre is in prison, under new proceedings opened by judge Baltasar Garzón against Askatasuna.

Charges

With these proceedings, the investigation judge Baltasar Garzón suspended the activity of Gestoras Pro Amnistía and Askatasuna, considering its public activity illegal from the point of view of the criminal law and accused the 17 that were in prison and other 10 of a crime of “belonging to an armed organisation”.

The judge reverts the process of the investigation, contrary to law and logic, as first, a conclusion is given out –that Gestoras belongs to the structure of ETA- and later, through interpretations and speculations they look for the evidence, the factual arguments to support that theory.

The alleged criminal actions of Gestoras would be:

1.- Exercising control over the collective of ETA prisoners, connecting and communicating with the members and representatives through their lawyers.

2. - Guaranteeing internal cohesion and obedience to the discipline imposed by this organization on the collective, avoiding any individual initiative in the course of their prison sentence and cancelling any possibility of dissent or breaking from the collective.

3.-Co-operating with and financing the maintenance of ETA prisoners and refugees.

4.- Co-ordinating and driving forms of struggle that complement those of ETA and support for the demonstrations of the prisoners’ collective.

5. - Gathering important information for ETA’s internal security, taking this from the penal processes that members are involved in, and passed on by some of their lawyers, greatly exceeding the right to defence.

6. - Pointing out who they believe are responsible for the situation and condition of ETA prisoners, turning them into possible targets for that organization; or against persons or institutions that don’t back the demonstrations called in support for and solidarity with ETA prisoners.

7.- Taking advantage of the sensitivity caused by the supposed violation of the rights of ETA prisoners to induce volunteers and regenerate the operational structure of ETA.

8.- The setting up and development of the project named Alde Hemendik .

9.- Co-ordinating and directing the so-called “X and Y struggles” Kale borroka (urban struggle) and “days of struggle” that are carried out in support of ETA members or due the death of a member, or other contingent circumstances.

10. - The initiative and decision on when the ETA prisoners collective begin a hunger strike or cell lock- in and other actions.

11.- Publishing the magazine ZOHARDIA, directed by Mikel Korta Carrión, who was included in the Indictment 18/98 for his membership of ETA-Ekin.

All these activities are carried out by Gestoras, under the control and direction of ETA-KAS and ETA-Ekin, through the corresponding instruments developed by those detained and others accused”.

In the following points of the indictment he goes over each one of the detainees and assigns them greater responsibility in one or another of the activities above, in an attempt to justify their supposed “criminal” activity. Amongst the elements of accusation in the indictment is the fact of having belonged in the past to other student, youth or social organizations, to be connected emotionally with a prisoner or a political refugee, participation in acts of homage to prisoners, campaigning, calling demonstrations, attending meetings, developing projects...

These activities, in any case, were publicly carried out by this organisation and in no way could be understood to constitute a crime, as is proven by the fact that they have never been accused of other minor crimes such as “glorifying terrorism”.

In the case of other activities that have are criminal and are may lead to the charge of belonging to a terrorist organisation, they is no way to prove these charges, as no rational evidence of criminality has been presented, no reference to damage against any juridical good protected by the criminal legislation. Again, the charges are generic, brought against groups of people, collectively, in a clear breach of the individuality and precision that must be the basis of any criminal charges.

Conclusions

In the face of these charges and in these circumstances, the trial against these 27 colleagues from the Amnesty Movement will begin on April 21st, 2008, with a petition from the public prosecutor of 10 years in prison.

In view of all the above, we wwould like to make the point that the participation of these people in different areas and organizations of the broad Amnesty Movement has always been open and transparent and has always been known to the public. The connection of this social activity and the actions committed by ETA is absolutely unacceptable and is based on arguments and interpretations lacking any kind of factual or rational basis.

We are aware, nevertheless, that this extensive application of anti-terrorist definitions to public and transparent actions has a long history in the Spanish justice system, hence the Supreme Court in the case of Haika-Segi and the subsequent Audiencia Nacional verdict in reference to Case 18/98, which only makes the position of our colleagues facing this trial worse.

This process is simply a smoke curtain that attempts to discredit a social organization and tries to criminalize the work of denouncing the vulnerability of the rights of Basque prisoners, refugees and deportees and also tries to avoid the social expressions of solidarity with this collective. The r3emand in custody for four years of 13 of these colleagues, released on millionaire bails, the suspension of the activities of these organizations, have generated a total block of freedom of expression and of the right of association and peaceful petition, because the mobilizations and demonstrations organized by this movement have been consistently forbidden by court, suspended administratively and violently attacked by the State Security Forces.

This trial is a further landmark on the road to criminalize, with no legal basis, solidarity with political prisoners, opposition to repression and to state violence and mobilization in defence of human rights. The states, convinced of their strategy of maintaining the repression against increasingly broader sections of the population, require higher levels of impunity.

The way of doing things of the Audiencia Nacional as an instrument for the application of special antiterrorist laws, a vivid example of the “law for an enemy” shows us the impossibility of receiving a fair trial in front of this exceptional tribunal. Furthermore, keeping in mind the events mentioned above, we believe that the trial will be a mere masquerade designed without content to administer a previously written political verdict. We are not expecting, hence, justice from this court. Nevertheless, we are expecting an opportunity to explain to Basque and international society who we are and what we are seeking.

This type of political-judicial trials moves us further away from the aims we share with Basque society: ending the repression and seeking the definitive resolution of the Basque conflict.

.... ... .

42 Imprisoned

This information comes to us thanks to the Irish Solidarity Committees With The Basque Country:

EH NEWS: SPANISH INQUISITION

Spanish Court orders arrests of 46 defendants on 18/98

11/30/2007

The sentence on this case is not going to be announced until December, but judges have already considered their verdict and that is why they ordered the arrests of the defendants.

34 people have been arrested so far accused of being related to 18/98 case, judicial officials reported. Spanish National Court ordered on Friday the arrests of 46 defendants on this this macro-trial.

This trial was the largest ever made in terms of the number of defendants. The judges heard testimonies of more than 300 people. Those on trial included alleged members of Basque social political gropus, media and other organizations. Spanish National Court banned their activities citing they were supporters of Basque armed group ETA.

Spanish Court ordered all the arrests, investigation officials reported. According to these sources, the sentence on this case is not going to be read until December. But, the court has ordered police to put them under detention before the convictions are announced, a court official said.

List of arrested people

Txema Matanzas, Jesus Mari Zalakain, Elena Beloki, Alberto Frias, Javier Balanzategi, Javier Salustregi, Joxe Mari Olarra, Mikel Korta, Iñaki O'Shea, Juan Mari Mendizabal, Mario Zubiaga, Iker Casanova, Manuel Intxauspe, Jose Garcia Mijangos, Natale Landa and Olatz Egiguren.

The International commission "Euskal Herria Watch" on case 18/98

The "Euskal Herria Watch" international commission, made up of lawyers from various countries, had the opportunity to participate in the sessions celebrated between the 21 st of November 2005 and the 14 th of March of 2007 in the 18/98 proceeding. The parties on trial are private businesses, the newspaper Egin and the radio station Egin Irratia, the Basque political organisation Ekin, the foundation for the promotion of the social movements Joxemi Zumalabe and the European association Xaki for international activity.

This report contains a summary of our main concerns, based on the monitoring work carried out, as well as a series of conclusions regarding this particular trial.

The accusation

The public prosecution and the private prosecution carried by the Association of Victims of Terrorism charged 51 people who have participated in the mentioned businesses and associations with a crime of "belonging to a terrorist organisation". On this bases, the prosecution asked for 10 to 50 years of prison for the defendants, as well as other accessory penalties. Afterwards, the prosecutor reduced the petition for 4 to 19 years depending on the consideration of "collaboration" with or "membership" of an armed group. Among the defendants the persons prosecuted for their relationship with the Egin newspaper's board of directors faced the higher petitions. In total, where before the prosecution asked for 927 years of imprisonment, now they ask for 484.

The charges brought by the Investigating judge and taken on by the public prosecution and the private prosecution are not rooted in any concrete facts or particular evidence. The charges are based on the idea that these people participated in the aforementioned organisations to infer afterwards that these organisations belong to ETA. Even if the first part of that logic is granted because of the public and notorious activity of these social and political activists, the second part lacks any reason or evidence to be assessed, but is no more than a speculative interpretation built on suspicions. These suspicions are limited to sporadic contact among defendants and members of the ETA armed organisation, to the interest expressed by ETA about these organisations, reflected in its internal documentation, and finally, to the coincidence in the political goals: sovereignty for the Basque Country. The suspicions on which the charges are based are not criminal activity. The situation could be explained as the late German lawyer and observer, Martin Poell manifested to the media "we have known about cases without evidence, but this is the first case that does not even have crimes".

Without individualized criminal conduct, the construction of the connexion among these organisations on trial with ETA is mere speculation.

The public hearing: the right to a defence

The defence has come across an unlimited number of difficulties to exercise their professional task. A list of issues that had to be solved before the hearings began could have stopped it: the trial began in the absence of three defendants, without the orders for them to be brought before the court having been issued. A previous appeal challenging a number of expert witnesses had not been resolved; it was rejected by the tribunal on the spot. The prosecution has requested a number of companies to be declared illegal and have their assets seized, and they have not even been summoned to appear in court. They have not been notified of the charges, which amounts to civil death, because they are not party to the proceedings and cannot defend themselves, therefore, if they were convicted this would mean the proceedings will be voided. Last, but not least in terms of the guaranteeing of the right to a defence, a series of documentary tests requested by the defence before the beginning of the trial have not been carried out, despite the fact that they should have been done before the trial began and that the tribunal had agreed to their being carried out. It is due to the hurry showed by the Court to carry on with the hearing that these questions, that can bring about an effect of nullity, were simply ignored.

A decision to begin and continue the trial was made by the tribunal, over and above the fact that the case –a 207,000 page-long monster- is in a state of chaotic disorder. There is no index of pieces of evidence; the whereabouts of these pieces of evidence is often unknown, which makes access to the evidence difficult for both prosecution and defence; finding a document means an effort that often turns out to be futile, thereby causing repeated adjournments to continue the search.

On the 15th session of the trial, the 21st of December 2005, the evidence in Prior Proceedings 75/89, was brought to the Court. It is a series of police reports, transcriptions of tapped phone conversations and other documents which have been kept under official secret since 1989. The prosecution had access to that documentation but not the defence; these documents remained in secrecy for them. Due to the impossibility to have access to that evidence even being brought to the Court, t he defence lawyers requested the protection of their respective Bar Associations and the Basque Council of Lawyers. Those plus the President of the Spanish Council of Lawyers held a meeting with the President of the Audiencia Nacional to grant the fundamental right to a defence.

One of the most shocking violations of the right to a defence in the view of the observers that have participated in this first part of the hearings was the ban on the defendants to make their statement freely in front of the Court and, more specifically their right to explain why they were refusing to answer the questions by the prosecution. The defendants had decided this, as a clear political statement. Nevertheless, the president of the Court cut the intervention of the defendants forbidding any further explanation immediately after declaring their refusal to answer. Of course, if it is not appropriately explained, by attitude on the part of the defendants can be understood as a fearful or doubtful position under cross examination by the prosecutor. One of the lawyers mentioned the jurisprudence of the European Court in Strasbourg – dated 2 May 2000, in the Condron vs. the UK case-, annulling a trial because the reasons why the defendant was remaining silent were not stated in the minutes. The president of the Court answered to the lawyer that "I do not care what Strasbourg says".

For this and other reasons we can see that the attitude of the Court has been manifestly aggressive and authoritarian towards the defendants. The inquisitorial character of the hearing and the and the intense and worrying emotive implication of the president of the Court in it, instead of being impartial and "super partes" has been made clear. A Court should uphold basic rights at the time of doing justice, as the effective judicial tutelage for all the people in the exercise of their legitimate rights and interest, without legal protection and the right to a trial with full guaranties, to use all the pertinent means for the defence and the right to be presumed innocent.

It is relevant to underline that the Court never has ruled in favour of the defence in any of the many incidents that have occurred due to irregularities in the development of the proceedings. All of them must be resolved in the final decision by the Court.

Quality of evidence

Throughout the hearing not a single allegation containing concrete, individualised facts was put forward. The evidence consisted of the reading of documents allegedly seized from ETA, statements taken from some defendants under incommunicado detention, telephone tapping and statements by the agents of the Central Unit of Intelligence of the National Police and the Investigation services of the Civil Guard, brought in as court experts and the main revealing factor of the prosecution.

These agents make their anonymous testimony as court experts, understanding that they provide the court with alleged expertise and objective knowledge, in their the field of activity. However, it is clear that, even if they present themselves as expert in the fight against ETA, their statements are an interested and biased account of the facts, as they have taken part in the investigation. They gave their statements collectively, all together, behind a screen that separates them for the public, not from the defendants. They have permission from the tribunal to discuss their answers and correct each other. In practice, the opinion of these agents introduced by the Court as "experts" has the role of rectifying the gaps in the evidence.

Nevertheless, their statement were full of incongruence and contradictions, such as the one referring to the origin of some of the documents, the identities of the persons that appear in those documents under nicknames, or the alleged connection between the newspaper Egin or the Foundation Joxemi Zumalabe with ETA.

One of the matters that have had a shocking effect is the identification of one of the experts as one of the officer conducting torture at the interrogation of Nekane Txapartegi and Mikel Egibar. The latter asked the Court to uphold his right to question the experts. The reaction by the president, Angela Murillo was to shout "sit down! be quiet!" losing her nerves and asking the police that guard the Court to form a human wall between the Civil Guard agents acting as experts and the defendants, who shouted "torturers!!". Murillo, overwhelmed, decided to adjourn the session.

Matters of humanitarian nature

As mentioned, the trial lasted 16 months in a Court especially built in a neighbourhood at the outskirts of Madrid . The defendants were obliged to be present every day that court is in session. The only accommodation was to replace the Thursday and Friday sessions with night sessions on Mondays and Tuesdays. It is surprising to hear that being present in the courtroom is not a right of the defendants, in their best interest, but an obligation imposed on them. It seems evident that this is not a measure aimed at guaranteeing the defendants have full knowledge of the proceedings and a better chance to exercise their right to a defence but an extra obligation imposed on them after the accused had repeatedly stood against it. It has caused many traffic accidents in the long journeys from the Basque Country to Madrid, has generated adjournments and delays due to the difficulties to appear in the Court for all the defendants. It has also made the defendants' daily life more difficult, their family and work activities, and affected their economies, creating a high physical and psychological cost.

A particular mention should be made to the case of Iñigo Elkoro who, due to a serious disease, had to be separated from the trial and a new trial will have to take place, so as not to interfere with the main proceedings. In the case of Jokin Gorostidi, the day before he had to make his statement in court he suffered a he suffered a heart attack with the result of his death on 25 th April 2006. The attitude of the Court towards the defendants can be considered cruel and degrading treatment.

The Issue of Torture

On 6th May 2006 defendant Xabier Alegría declared in court: He has the highest petition from the prosecutor, with 100 years in prison. He explained he had suffered torture during incommunicado detention. The lawyers submitted a copy of other procedures including this fact, the prosecution did not deny the submission and the Court admitted it.

The 18th of April, was the turn of Mikel Egibar who provided the Court with an account of torture during his detention by the Civil Guard on 10th March 1999, including beatings, suffocation with a plastic bag, threats against him and his family… during five days, before was brought to the National Court. The next day Nekane Txapartegi gave her statement, explaining that her incommunicado detention lasted 10 days and included death threats, the plastic bag and sexual harassment, even being raped by four Civil Guards.

The statements taken under torture are used by the court to base the accusations in this trial 18/98 and to introduce incriminatory evidence against the people that suffered it and the rest of the defendants.

Conclusions: ideological accusation and expansive interpretation of the penal definitions

The accusation carried by the public Prosecutor and the Association of Victims of Terrorism asked, in their separated reports, for a conviction while the defence asked for acquittal of all defendants.

The reports of conclusions of the accusations are not based on the reasons and evidence that have appeared during the hearing. On the contrary, they come from the first interpretation developed during the stage of investigation by the head of Court of Investigation nº 5 of the National Court, Baltasar Garzón. The public prosecutor, as he lacks evidence to support his theory, recited a brief and specific review of the history of ETA, to wind up his statement on the organisations and businesses that are on trial, and to recount the charges brought against them: KAS would be an "instrument" used by ETA for "direction of the movement", which, at the same time, would control a business scheme dedicated to maintaining ETA members abroad" and members of KAS itself. Ekin, according to this theory, would have been created to "replace" KAS; Xaki would be the latest version of "ETA's external relations"; and the Joxemi Zumalabe Foundation would have taken the baton from ASK to continue to "invigorate the popular movement". Finally, Egin and its publishing company Orain S.A. would make up ETA's "intermediary front" or "fourth front".

At this point, the representative of the Attorney General had no other choice than to admit that the written charges contained serious errors, and that several of the charges against the defendants had no legal foundation. Nevertheless, he concluded that participating in any of these organisations is at the same time to be an active member of ETA due to the "divisional theory". "All of the structures participating in that global structure" which for him the nationalist left is, "are contaminated with the goals and objectives" of ETA. So, lacking rational evidence, the accusations will use an ideological interpretation, a philosophical deduction to ask the Court to deliver a conviction.

But moreover, the designation of the facts as crimes of "collaboration" or "belonging to an armed group" are based on a new definition of terrorism tailor-made to include the activities in this trial. In fact, the prosecutor asked the Court, contrarily to the classic jurisprudence that advocates for a restricted interpretation of the concept of terrorism, to make it wider to include these social and political activities. To do so, he counts with the precedent of the decision of the Supreme Court in the 18/01 case referred to the youth organisations Haika-Segi.

On 19/02/2005 the Audiencia Nacional issued a decision whereby it stated the youth organisations Jarrai, Haika and Segi are not terrorist organisations because they do not use weapons or explosives, although the Court did declare them illegal and sentenced 24 young Basques to between two and half years and three and a half years in prison, more or less the time they had served in pre trial detention. This decision was appealed by the defence and the Prosecution, for different reasons, before the Supreme Court. The defence asking for the acquittal and the prosecution, specifically, defended its aim was to obtain new jurisprudence on the definition of "belonging to an armed group" which could be applied in other proceedings.

On January 19, 2007, the Supreme Court published its decision. Indeed, three of the judges believe these organisations are "illegal associations which amount to a terrorist gang, organisation or group" and gave 23 young Basques 6 years in prison whilst they acquitted one. The decision introduces a new expansive interpretation of what is an "armed organisation", as was asked in the appeal by the Association of Victims of Terrorism "according to the new times". A further two members of the Tribunal voted against this decision, giving a dissident vote considering that it "creates a new configuration of armed group" taking into account two elements: one the entity of the facts related to the practice of the "urban guerrilla", that can not be compared to the "terrorist acts that are committed by terrorist groups that have deserved the application of the crime of armed organisation" and as stated by the magistrate Martínez Arrieta and for the lack of real integration in the armed structure, opinion of magistrate Giménez García: «if there is a invitation to become a member of ETA it means that you do not belong to it, so the candidate comes from a different collective to ETA ». Thus, both magistrates of the Supreme Court supported the initial interpretation of the National Court.

The chain of armed activity established, in penal terms, from the urban guerrilla to finish with the public and peaceful political action that now is under judgement must be taken into account. This interpretation will be the determinant element in the deliberations of the Third section of the Penal Room of the National Court to reach a decision.

Conclusions

On the aforementioned findings, the International Commission "Euskal Herria Watch" wish to make public the next conclusions.

1. The investigation of the 18/98 case has been carried out in a chaotic manner and in flagrant violation of the right to a defence, using the secrecy of actions in an absolutely unacceptable way.

2. The violations of equality of opportunities between the prosecution and the defence are quite alarming. The tribunal did not accept a single one of the challenges brought by the defence.

3. The lack of precision as to the allegedly criminal activities and the lack of individual charges contravenes, in an essential way, the bases of the rule of law whereby a defendant must face charges -involving certain criminal conduct- from which he or she can defend himself or herself.

4. The treatment dispensed to the defendants during the hearing, including the obligation to travel and be present in all the sessions has generated a physical and psychological cost that could be considered a form of cruel and inhuman treatment. The effect of this on the health of the defendants is ascertained.

5. The use of statements which were allegedly made under torture is an intrinsic violation of human rights, because of the use of torture itself, and even the allegation should void the evidence.

6. The quality of the evidence was completely inappropriate, with many irregularities, rational doubt as to the origin of documentary evidence and blatant inefficiency of the witnesses called by the prosecution. The expert evidence given by members of the State Security Forces deserves special comment, as the tribunal has elevated police suspicion, prejudice and speculation to the level of scientific, objective and infallible evidence.

7. The use of ambiguous legal definitions and their broad and inclusive application contradict the principle of legality.

8. The state is attempting to criminalise legal, public and transparent activities through a political trial. This is, in itself, a serious attack on the right to freedom of speech, opinion and association. The mention in documents and statements of other associations during the hearing is an attack on their rights and their legal security.

9. We also believe that the Tribunal, the Audiencia Nacional is a special Tribunal for crimes of terrorism and given its high level of politicisation , and the nervous and authoritarian attitude of the chair of the Court, it would seem that the verdict, instead of being an act to find criminal facts and seek justice has been an attempt to provide a appearance of justice to a political decision.

10. Still waiting for the decision, the development of the hearings, the position taken by the prosecutions, the tension generated due to the attitude of the president of the Court and the precedent that was given by the Supreme Court in reference to the 18/01 Haika-Segi case bring us to deduct that the final decision will have an extremely poor juridical quality.

~ ~ ~

Interview with Segi Members in Ireland

This interview was published at An Phoblacht (thanks to them news about the facts regarding the Basque conflict reach the English speaking web surfers):

Repression, criminalisation no solutions to conflict

Basque conflict will only be resolved by negotiation – SEGI

Segi, the Basque youth organisation was banned by the Spanish judge, Baltasar Garzón in February 2002. Previously, Garzón had banned the two Basque youth organisations that preceded Segi – Jarrai and Haika. Forty two youth, members of the executive of the groups, were charged with membership of ETA, as Garzón considered that supporting the right to self-determination of the Basque people is not only illegal, but criminal.

The case descended into a farce when another judge of the Audiencia National – the Spanish version of the Special Criminal Court, considered that Garzón’s arguments were not valid and released all detainees, after handling them minimum sentences for membership of illegal organisations. However, 19 of the 23 released were again imprisoned last February, after the court changed the initial sentence. The new decision of the Audiencia National took place only weeks after ETA planted a bomb in the carpark of Madrid airport.

The increasing repression suffered by the Basque pro-independence movement and the immediate imprisonment linked to membership of any of the banned organisations is the backdrop to the decision by two members of Segi who visited Ireland early this month deciding not to disclose their identities. During their Irish visit, An Phoblacht’s SALLY GALLAGHER spoke to the Segi representatives.

What is the reason for this visit to Ireland?

We came to help organise the trip that members of Ógra Shinn Fein are going to make to the Basque Country in September

How is your relationship with Ógra Sinn Fein?

The relationship with Ógra is a few years old already, and we consider it something important as they are an organisation very similar to ours, with common areas of work. This allows us to share points of view and reflections on our political projects. It is also very important for us because they have the experience of the kind of peace process we are working for. Even when in many aspects the situation in Ireland is different, their experience is something we can learn from.

Could you describe the situation faced by the Basque youth movement at the moment?

The situation is that, since January when the Spanish Special Court declared SEGI a terrorist organisation, we have been prosecuted for our activities. Our former leader is serving a six-year jail sentence. We cannot even put up a banner or a poster in the street because we risk being identified by the police, sent to Madrid, being charged with membership of a terrorist organisation and being sent to prison. But even in this environment people keep organising, SEGI keeps working and fighting but we have to take measures, like not publicising our identities, so as not to facilitate the police in throwing us in jail.

What were the arguments used by the Spanish courts to label SEGI as a terrorist organisation?

The truth is that we do not believe there was any judicial basis for it. From our point of view it was a straightforward political decision. SEGI is dangerous for them, as we fight for a political project, we support independence for the Basque Country, and we are socialist, so we fight the Spanish and French capitalist imposition in the Basque Country. What they were trying to achieve was to end our struggle and to take us off the political scene.

But, why at this particular moment? SEGI or the previous youth organisations have been active since the 1980s. So, why now?

I think it was a consequence of the Spanish Popular Party being in government. They took the decision that as part of their strategy of oppression against the Basque Country they would attack the political structures of the Basque pro-independence movement. What they were trying to do was to establish that everything is ETA, so every single political organisation or social movement working for the national and social liberation of the Basque Country were accused of being an integral part of ETA.

This allowed for their criminalisation and opened the door to their illegalisation. And within this strategy they have proceeded against numerous political and social organisations. The first to go through the whole procedure has been JARRA/HAIKA/SEGI which are the different youth organisations that have been active in the Basque Country. Labelling us a terrorist organisation is the last step in this process.

Has the fact of being declared a terrorist organisation had any effect in the work of the youth movement?

Not really. I am not going to deny that we are afraid because labelling an organisation as ‘terrorist’ is a major step. But the truth is that there has not been any gap in our work. People keep organising in the colleges, towns, cities. We keep working. We keep fighting in the streets. The fact is that when we were declared illegal for the first time, some five years ago, we had a rough time as we had to accommodate our work to a new reality – our way of working had to be adapted to the new situation. But a lot of time has passed since then and we have improved a lot. So when they declared us a terrorist organisation last February, people did not feel that the situation had changed that much as we were already illegal.

But six years in jail is a long time. Being harassed by the police is one thing but going to jail is something totally different, especially when you are a teenager.

As I said we were already an illegal organisation. We were supposed to be a clandestine organisation. Even if being declared a terrorist organisation is qualitatively different, the truth is that during the period from which we had been declared illegal until last February, we had time to overcome our fears and got ready to face that situation.

Yes you can face a six years long or an even longer jail sentence but the truth is that we were facing similar ones before. I think that when people have a clear idea of what they are they fighting for and they hold their principles dear, they are ready to take the risk.

Now that ETA’s ceasefire is over, after 14 months, how does SEGI see the future?

We were hopeful with the situation up to recently, not only because of the ceasefire but also because we could see how the social and political situation was changing in the last few years. There was a majority in the Basque Country looking for a change, and ETA seemed to have taken into account those social and political conditions as it took the decision to use the ceasefire to approach a new scenario where the political conflict could be solved in a political way. But the reality was that for over a year the Socialist Party in the Spanish Government – with the help of the Basque Nationalist Party PNV – resisted taking any step towards the resolution of the conflict. The negotiations have been constantly stalled by these two parties. They did not seem to be ready to approach a solution based on the two main factors that caused the conflict in the first place – territoriality and the right to self-determination.

Even if everybody agrees that the conflict has political roots, they were not ready to negotiate a political solution to the conflict. The left pro-independence movement put on the table a political proposal to end the conflict. This proposal was based on those two factors that were the key to the conflict, but the Spanish Government and the PNV said no to the proposals and failed to come up with an alternative.

And now?

Batasuna’s political proposal is the key to the solution and we need to publicise the proposal among the people in the Basque Country. Once a majority knows the ins and outs of it, we will have to try to push all the political parties to negotiate, because we know that the solution will come from negotiation. There is no other way. Repression or criminalisation are not solutions.

In this new scenario what is the role of SEGI?

Our aim is to fight for, and build up our independence on a daily basis, while trying to gather as much strength as we can around the pro-independence Basque movement. But at this moment in time we also see it as our responsibility to publicise the content of the political proposal for the solution of the conflict, among youth. Now, during the summer; that will be our main line of work and we will keep working on those issues that we usually do such as housing, students rights, etc.

.... ... .

Viatge a Euskal Herria

Here you have a nice slide show made by a young pro-independence Catalonyan. An added plus is the beautiful song "Haika Mutil" by Mikel Laboa used as soundtrack.

Visca Catalunya Lliure!

~ ~ ~

Civil and Political Rights

There is a very interesting article at Berria today, it provides information about the upcoming trial in the 18/98 Case and the so called "Excercise Book".

Here you have the entire article, is worth reading:

Demand for civil and political rights receives broad support

A thick, colourful, varied ‘Exercise Book’ reached its finishing post and two volumes were needed to include all the contributions

Aitziber Laskibar – DURANGO (Bizkaia)

The hearing in the 18/98 Case is about to start. Within a week 59 Basque citizens will be tried at the Spanish National Criminal Court. The Public Prosecutor is not only requesting 991 years behind bars for the indictees but also the dissolving of certain companies. But the 59 will not be going down to Madrid on their own; they will be going with the support of thousands of citizens. With the words and drawings that have been added to the ‘Exercise Book’ and with the warmth reflected in yesterday’s event in Durango (Bizkaia), which a large crowd turned out for.

After crossing the whole of the Basque Country, the ‘Exercise Book’ was nice and thick by the time it got to Durango. There wasn’t room for the contributions people had added to be fitted into one volume, so more than two were needed. It is thick, colourful and varied. That is the final result of the ‘Exercise Book’. It has become a symbol because many, many Basque citizens feel there has been an abuse of civil and political rights. According to the journalist Mariano Ferrer of the 18/98 + Group, thousands of people have experienced these abuses personally; they feel “involved”. That is why there have been so many “personal and intimate” contributions. Ferrer expressed the view that the public at large had understood that the abuses of civil and political rights affect everyone.

People of many different persuasions have also made their own demands in favour of rights. Proof of this is the origin of those who took part in the initiatives in Durango. The number of people indicted in the cases included in the 19/98+ Group was also clear yesterday. These cases involve over 200 indictees and wherever one looked one could see people facing charges in one case or another. Among those who turned up were Loren Arkotxa and Maribi Ugarteburu of Udalbiltza; Martxelo Otamendi, Iñaki Uria and Joanmari Larrarte of Egunkaria;Arnaldo Otegi, Pernando Barrena and Joseba Permach of Batasuna; Juan Mari Olano and Jon Enparantza of the Pro-Amnesty Movement (AAM); Rafa Diez of the trade union LAB and most of the indictees in the cases relating to the Haika and Segi Basque nationalist left youth organisations. They were joined by Jone Goirizeliala, Arantza Zulueta and Iker Urbina, the lawyers defending them.

Yesterday a prominent role was taken by the indictees in the 18/98 case, which is about to start; they climbed up onto the stage and filled it. They got a warm round of applause from the audience. They in turn applauded the people who had come to support them.

.... ... .

Guilty Even When Not

For decades Madrid has followed a simple yet perverse policy against the Basque society.

They accuse anyone working in behalf of the Basque self determination of being part of something they call the entorno.

A literal translation of entorno would be environment or surroundings.

Meaning, anything and everything Basque is part of ETA, since they are Basque.

I could come up with quite a few similar comparisons if I wanted.

A few years back, from the hand of clown Judge Garzon, Madrid started a process against a number of Basque youth organizations; Jarrai, Haika and Segi. These organizations were aimed at providing the Basque youth with projects and spaces in which they could express themselves, something sorely needed to curb the increased use of drugs among youngsters.

Since these groups supported the right to self determination and (gasp!) independence, they were branded as part of ETA.

Yesterday Spain's highest court, the Audiencia Nacional, ruled these groups are not part of ETA:

Spain's highest court has ruled a youth organisation with links to ETA was not a terrorist group and ondemned 24 members of Segi to light sentences.

They were given jail terms of between two and three-and-a-half years for belonging to an illegal organisation.

Four other accused escaped any sentence.

Yes, you read that right, even after ruling that they were not part of ETA, they still were handed sentences, go figure that one out.

But notice the language Expatica uses: "Four other accused escaped any sentences".

These four others spent years in jail awaiting a resolution of their case, they were found non guilty, yet for Expatica, they escaped any sentences, as if they deserved them but got away without them.

Which comes to show that for the Spanish media, the Basques are not only guilty until proven innocent, they are guilty even when innocent.

What about the years spent in jail just to be proven innocent?

At least there is a sentence in the article that provides a little measure of hope:

The Audiciencia Nacional said only ETA can be defined in law as a terrorist organisation as it used arms.

So, there you go, Ikastolas are not terrorist organizations, Basque media outlets are not terrorist organizations, Basque unions and political parties are not terrorist organizations, hopefully someone will pay attention to the Audiencia Nacional.

Berria provides more info:

The most significant aspect, however, is the crime the Court has found them guilty or not guilty of. The case had been built on Judge Baltasar Garzon’s assertions that as the indictees were the leaders of the youth organisations, they were therefore ETA members. The Prosecutor Enrique Molina also deliberately stuck to this hypothesis during the trials. The Prosecutor embarked on the trial pressing for convictions of up to fourteen years for 33 of the indictees. In the final report he was pressing for ten-year sentences for 28 of the indictees. The charges against the other five were dropped after admitting there was insufficient proof for convicting them.

* The article cited here was originally published by Anti-Basque outlet Expatica, you can also read it at Artxiboak.

UPDATE: The blog Oread Daily has a very compelling post regarding this issue, it is called Basque Youth Face Repression:

The trial was merely the latest in the assault on the Basque Nationalist Left. For several years now newspapers, political parties, radio stations, cultural associations, and schools have been shut down by the Spanish state, while hundreds have been jailed, thousands driven into exile, and millions of Euros worth of assets seized. Always Spain claims the targets are members of ETA and therefore terrorists.

Many of those charged and/or convicted are held far away from their homes, sometimes on the Canary Islands, so that visits are difficult.

Revolution reports that Basque prisoners are commonly tortured. Spanish law allows prisoners suspected of terrorism to be held five days with no outside communication or lawyer. Reports of beatings, electric shock, suffocation with plastic bags, threats of rape and the like are common. Revolution says, “The number of incidents reported, including cases of attempted suicide by prisoners, has led even the United Nations to recognize that the Spanish government is violating the conditions it agreed to in the Convention against Torture.”

~ ~ ~

BIC's Newsletter II

Here you have the most recent newsletter from BIC:

Dear sympathiser of the Basque Information Centre (BIC),

We provide every month an English overview of news-events about the left wing Basque independence struggle and other relevant topics from Euskal Herria. We hope you will benefit from this mail and that you stay with us. Please check for all kinds of documents in English and items to buy in on our website www.baskinfo.org

Agur!

BIC, The Netherlands

Monthly digital BIC-Newsletter nr. 2, period 1 February – 15 March 2005

1) Basque political prisoners
2) Initiatives from the Basque Country to come to a political
solution of the conflict
3) Repression in the Basque Country
4) ETA
5) ‘Plan-Ibarretxe’
6) Elections Basque Country 17 April

1) A letter from a Basque political prisoner from the prison of Jaén II, at 800 kilometres of the Basque Country, about the circumstances: “Every day for 4 hours we are being let out in two terms. (...) The cells are 4 by 3 metres and totally cement, with a sink and a stone cupboard for clothes. We have to eat in our cells. Once a week we can write 2 letters, that are delivered one month later. Once a week we can make a phone call of 5 minutes. The visits lasts 40 minutes in a room where we can hardly hear each other and all conversations are being recorded. We are not allowed to go the sports area or do other activities. Besides that we are being punished for all kind of small things. (...)

There were never as much Basque political prisoners as nowadays, not even under Franco; 719 as was made public by the prisonhelpgroup Etxerat at 4 March. Last year was a heavy year for the prisoners, and also for their family-members. In total 47 accidents occurred with people travelling up and down prisons involved; 1 person was killed, 126 were wounded. Because of the huge distances they have to travel (an average of 1400 kilometres), the bad condition of the roads, the dangerous traffic, the hurry and loss of concentration, many accidents happen. And it costs the families an average of 1.600 euro each month.

At 14 March, one year after the PSOE took over from the PP, 700 Basque political prisoners went on hunger strike for the recognition of their political rights and the rights as an individual. In a declaration the prisoners claim that the Spanish and French authorities reacted on protests so far with punishment measures. The EPPK, the prisoners collective, calls for an end to the dispersion, for the return to Basque prisons and for participation in the political process in their country.

2) The ‘conflict resolution committee’ that was set up by the National Debate Forum, has presented at 1 February an international group that has to guard the process. It contains of Sjurdur Skaale, an ex-parlementarian of the Faroer-islands, Verena Graf, a Swiss human rights expert, Alec Reid, the Irish priest who played an important role in the Irish peace process, the Catalans Aureli Argemi and Monica Sabata of the Centre for Ethnic Minorities and Nations and the former secretary of state from Idaho, United States, Pete Cenarrusa.

In Bilbao demonstrate at 13 February thousands of people against the European constitution.

The Platfrom 18/98+, that represents and defends the accused in the ‘case 18/98’ against the Basque independence movement, manifests at 19 February with 2000 people in Donostia. In the ‘case 18/98’ 220 people, who are active in all kinds of ways for the independence of the Basque Country, are being connected with ETA. During the case people are unlawfully detained, there has been tempered with evidence, people have been tortured, placed in isolation and abused and locked in on political reasons. Nobody is convicted, although some cases are from 1998.

At the referendum about the European constitution 60% of the people who were allowed to vote stayed at home in the Basque Countr; 24.6% voted for, 12.7% against.

At 26 February tens of thousands people demonstrated in Bilbao at a call from the platform 18/98+ behind the slogan ‘Eskubide zibil eta politikoen alde’, for civil and political rights. Despite it was hard to estimate how many people came, it was one of the biggest demonstrations in the Basque Country ever.

3) At 30 January 33 Basques, who were ever a member of the left political formations Herri Batasuna, Euskal Herritarrok or Batasuna, had to report in Madrid at the offices of the investigative judge Garzon to hear that they were being accused of ‘integration in an armed gang’. They all denied any ties with ETA and declared: ‘We came from Euskal Herria to the High Court to declare ourselves guilty on one item; the defence of the right of the Basque people for self determination’. Due to health reasons Jon Idigoras and Karlos Rodriguez were absent; they had to testify in the High Court in Bilbao. Gotzon Kortazar was already in prison, in Osny, France.

In Paris the European Arrest Warrant against Jean-Francois Lefort, the spokesman of the Basque prisonsolidarity group Askatasuna (according to the Spanish justice a ‘criminal organisation’), is denied on 2 February. It has probably to do with the fact that Leforts ‘crimes’ were committed on French soil. Lefort is still in prison in La Santé; 12 year prison is requested for him, also because Askatasuna is on the ‘European terrorist list’.

On 7 February the mass trial against the left Basque youth organisations Jarrai-Haika-SEGI starts in Madrid; 42 youngsters face 654 years in jail. The trial has to be in high speed tempo because the terms of 4 years imprisonment without trial of 6 of the youngsters is almost finished.19 others are already 3 years in pre-trial detention. 10 youngsters decided, faced with the charges between 10 and 112 year, to hide from the police. The defence has due to the speed of the trials hardly the time to prepare to the numerous accusations. Strange is the fact that SEGI is still legal operating on French soil, that France refused to extradite 3 SEGI-members to Spain and that the Spanish justice can’t provide any evidence for the accusation thatSEGI is part of ETA. Even stranger is the case of Asier Tapia, who will be locked up for 112 year. In March 2001 he called on a press conference to condemn and resist the arrests of 15 alleged members of Haika. The Spanish justice turned that call into ‘provoking violent actions’ and accuse him of 22 actions with ‘terrorist damage’. And above all that, there is the Asociacion de Victimas del Terrorisme (AVT), a cover organisation of the PP, who demonstrated at the end of January with slogans like ‘A united Spain can never be beaten’, ‘We will follow Spain until death’, who demands 336 years extra jail for the youngsters because of ‘an act of genocide’ against ‘everyone who didn’t apply to the national-terrorist dictates of the Basque Country’. The lawyers of the youngsters appeal at the Basque commission for human rights, at the Basque minister of justice, they appeal of course at the court itself and at the association of European lawyers. The trial continued the whole week and is full of irregularities, even the translator can’t cope with the Basque language. At 20 February the public prosecutor Enrique Molina calls some witnesses who has to back his case; Imanol Iparragirre testified in 1995 to the Guardia Civil that he was a member of KAS as well as Jarrai, with that backing Molina’s thesis that Jarrai was subdued to KAS. Ipparragirre, however, testified that his statement then was taken from him under torture and he complained at large at the current judge about it. At 5 March Olatz Dañobeitia,Olatz Karro, Garazi Biteri, Ugaitz Elizaran, Igor Ortega and Garikoitz Etxeberria have to be released because they ended their 4 years pre-trail detention. The appeal of the public prosecutor that they have to be kept another 126 days, because the defence was deliberately delaying the trial, was dismissed. The 6 have to report every day to the police station in their villages and are not allowed to travel abroad.

Despite the number of arrests of Basque citizens by Spanish, French and Basque police declining, there are more complaints about torture filed. In 2003 210 Basques were placed in the notorious ‘incommunicado’-detention, in 2004 138. 6 of them by the Ertzaintza, 46 by the Spanish police, 24 by the Guardia Civil, 58 by the French police and 4 by Belgian police. These figures are made public by the anti-torture group TAT at 7 February on a press conference and they complain at the same time about the time that passes between the actual torture-complaint and the treatment of that complaint, sometimes years. 57 complaints of torture were filed, divided over the Spanish police (35) and the Guardia Civil (22).

At 9 February 14 people are arrested in the Basque Autonomous Community and Cadiz and Valencia in an operation with 200 Spanish police officers, at the orders of Garzon. In Azpeitia in the province Gipuzkoa the police tries to arrest somebody, but the person escaped. The 14 are accused by the Spanish minister of Internal Affairs Jose Antonio Alonso of ‘recruiting people for ETA’. The names of the arrested come from documents seized from Ibon Fernandez-Iradi at his arrest in Baiona at 19 December 2002. On this papers 110 people are arrested up till now, 39 of them were released. Of these last 14, 3 were released, one had to pay a bail of 25.000 euro and 10 were put in jail. At 12 February Angel Alkalde, former parliamentarian of Herri Batasuna, is arrested at the stairs of the Audiencia Nacional, were he came voluntarily when he heard he was accused of ‘collaboration’. Garzon put him in Soto del Real in Madrid. In Getxo Antonio Orbegozo-Linares is arrested. Against Kizkitza Gil de San Vicente an arrest warrant is filed.

At the orders of the Frech investigative judge Le Vert 2 Benedicts, Juan Joxe Agirre (75) and Marcel Etxandi (70), are arrested in Lazkao (Gipuzkoa) and in Belloc in the Frech-Basque province Lapurdi. The Guardia Civil and the French police searched their archives and accused them of ‘connections to ETA’. The searches were connected to a letter the French police found in the house of the in October arrested Mikel Albisu, the so called leader of ETA. Agirre said he was released at the end of the day and that the police found copies of the ETA-magazine Zutabe, but the Benedicts archive everything about Euskal Herria. A copy of the report of the search and arrest was however refused, when Agirre asked for it. Etxandi was released after 2 days in the police station of Baiona. Some days later people from the cultural world protested against the arrest of Etxandi, through an open letter to the French government and also the Abertzaleen Batasuna and the Basque solidarity party EA come with a statement, in which they refer to the first raid of the Benedict abyss, in 1943 by the Gestapo.

In Madrid at 14 February the trail against 11 Basque youngsters accused of throwing molotov cocktails in 2000 to the barracks of the Guardia Civil in Galdako starts. Against each of them is 18 year requested for arson, 4 years for the inflicting of wounds and an amount of money to pay for the damage, 45.060 euro.

In Valencia Mikel Orebezogo and and Sara Majarenas are arrested on 17 February and explosives, weapons and documents are seized at their place. According to the police they were about to conduct an attack.

At 22 February in Andoian in the province Gipuzkoa the caravan company Itsasmendi is searched by numerous officers of the Spanish police. The search is connected to the case ‘Pro-amnistia’ into the funding of this organisation, that was closed by Garzon in 2001. Some members are still in prison, waiting for their trial.

Judge Garzon calls the former Sozialista Abertzaleak members Joseba Permach and Joseba Alvarez to testify in the ‘case-Batasuna’. He can do this now because the Basque parliament is dissolved because of the coming elections. He also would have liked to call Arnaldo Otegi and Jon Salaberria, but these 2 are member of the permanent commission of the parliament, so Garzon asked the Basque High Court to question them. It was for now the last working day of Garzon, who is going to the US for 9 months, to give lectures and to study English. Permach and Alvarez are being accused of being ‘ETA-member’, Josu Urritikoetxea also, against him run still an European Arrest Warrant and an international arrest warrant.

At 3 March hundreds of people commemorate in Gasteiz the bloody events of 3 March 1976 when the Spanish police attacked 5000 strikers, who were gathered in the San Fransisco church, killing 5 of them; Pedro Maria Martinez-Ocio, Fransisco Aznar, Romualdo Barroso, Bienvienido Perea and Jose Garcia-Castillo. Still this story is covered up and is there no justice done, according to the relatives of the victims. One of the main responsible, then minister of Internal Affairs and PP-founder Manuel Fraga, is still governor of Galicia.

Arnaldo Otegi has to defend himself at 10 March at the Basque High Court for a speech in which he called the Spanish king Juan Carlos ‘head of all torturers’. Otegi said this at a press conference just after the closing of the only newspaper in Basque Egunkaria in 2002, when it was revealed that 10 of the arrested people were tortured. The public prosecutor asks for 15 months in prison for Otegi.

4) ETA takes responsibility for 23 attacks she conducted between 15 September and 23 December 2004, but also complains about false claims in their name. ETA said to have nothing to do with the bomb call in the stadium of Real Madrid during a game against Real Sociedad. As we said wrongly as well.

The French newspaper Le Figaro writes in January that ETA has in France 150-200 so called ‘liberados’, people who are known by the police as ETA-member. At the end of January Europe Press writes that ETA is looking for foreign interlocutors to negotiate for them. People as Nelson Mandela, Mario Soares (former president of Portugal) and Fransesco Cossiga (former president of Italy) are being mentioned.

In the new book of the Spanish judge Garzon ‘A world without fear’ he writes that the 2 ETA-members who were caught putting a bag full explosives on a train just before Christmas 2003, ‘wanted to detonate when the train was out of service, so without passengers’. The 2, Gorka Loran and Garikoitz Arruarte, heard in November last year a demand of 2.788 years in prison, at the accusation of 184 attempts of murder, 180 passengers and 4 serviceman. Garzon also writes that it was not sure that the van that was intercepted in Cuenca, was to conduct a mass slaughter. Garzon doubts because the accusation was based on the statement of 1 person, who was ‘interrogated’ at the police station.

At 9 February ETA detonates a car bomb near the conference centre in Madrid; 43 people are slightly injured by glass falling. Half an hour before somebody of ETA called the Basque newspaper GARA. The bomb went off some hours before the Spanish king Juan Carlos and the Mexican president Fox were about to open the exhibition in the centre.

Between 10 and 18 February various embassies of EU-countries in Madrid and the air travel company KLM receive a letter from ETA warning them for attacks on tourist targets.

At 27 February a small ETA-bomb goes off after a warning in the garden of a holiday resort of employees of the BBVA-bank in Alicante. Nobody gets hurt.

5) At 1 February the Basque president Ibarretxe presents his plan for a ‘free association’ with Spain in the Spanish parliament. He defended in half an hour the right of the Basques to decide for their own future; ‘About our future is going to be decided by they who live and work in the Basque Country and not in the meetings of Zapatero and Rajoy (PP-chairman, BIC).’ As expected 164 members of the PSOE, 148 members of the PP, 3 of the communist IU, 3 of the coalition of Canaric Isles and 1 regionalist of Aragon (313 deputies in all) voted against. The 29 pro-voters were: 10 of the Catalan CiU, 8 of the left republican ERC from Catalonia, the 7 EAJ-PNV members of course, 2 of the Bloque Nacionalista from Galicia, 1 of the Basque Solidaruty party EA and 1 of the coalition Naffaroa Bai.

6) In a reaction on the dismissal of the ‘Plan-Ibarretxe’ in the Spanish parliament, the Basque government calls for early elections for 17 April. Ibarretxe calls the Spanish government to let ‘all political options’ participate, referring to the banned left wing party Batasuna. Batasuna on her turn calls on Ibarretxe not to call for elections as long as their participation is not guaranteed, because it would be ‘a serious obstacle to peace’, but Ibarretxe refuses.

The reaction of the Spanish minister of Justitce Lopez-Aguilar and the Spanish public prosecutor Candido Conde-Pumpido is swift; one day later they say Batasuna is not allowed to participate, under whatever name. Aguilar adds that Batasuna is not ‘legal because it refuses to condemn violence’ (...) ’Batasuna was banned on the local elections in 2003, with the common elections last year and with the European elections, and also this elections they will be banned, so that the result will be that they disappear from the political scene’.

At 15 February Batasuna announces to participate in the elections with their own lists and to use their peace proposal from 14 November last year as main point in their program. At the same day the Spanish daily El Pais wrote that the Guardia Civil together with the Spanish secret service CNI made a list of 1.500 people who are not allowed to take part in elections. These persons were never in contact with justice, were never on lists of Batasuna, never organised manifestations for political prisoners, but seemed to fit the profile of a left wing independentist and future candidate for Batasuna. The list for the elections, headed by Arnaldo Otegi, are in the eyes of the CNI ‘distraction manoeuvres’, because it is easy to ban. Besides the aforementioned list there is also a list of people who were on the banned lists from the local elections (254 lists), the common elections and the European. Reaction of Zapatero: ‘The ‘Law on the political parties’ will be put into effect to prohibit Batasuna from standing in the elections’.

At 16 February a platform is erected, Aukera Guztiak, that has to take care that every citizen of Araba, Gipuzkoa and Bizkaia has the possibility to make the choice of their preference at the coming elections. The founders, from a broad layer of Basque society, say that they don’t want to replace anybody and also not have a political manifest. They just want to defend the right for all political ideas to participate. To establish an electoral platform they collected 20.000 signatures and they presented a
list with 75 candidates. The Spanish public prosecutor has said he is ‘sure’ that Aukera Guztiak is a ‘front of Batasuna’ and that he will prosecute them.

BIC,
Pobox 2884,
3500 GW Utrecht,
The Netherlands.
baskinfo@xs4all.nl
www.baskinfo.org

.... ... .

Basque Youth and Irish Solidarity

This note was published at Indymedia Ireland:

Protests in Ireland in solidarity with banned Basque Youth movement

Forty people in Dublin, sixty in Belfast, fifteen in Galway and twenty in Derry gathered to express their solidarity with 42 Basque Youth activists of the Basque pro-independence left youth organizations Jarrai, Haika and Segi and who have been brought to courts in Madrid for a show trial and who are facing a total of 654 years in prison for their political work defending Basque youth rights and Basque Country's right to self-determination.

The judge and the state prosecution allege that "these organizations are all ETA".

Trials against the political party Batasuna, two anti-repression organizations, two newspapers, one magazine, a publishing house, etc. are to follow. All these organizations and media have been banned in the last 7 years.

Judge Garzon became famous worldwide for his attempt to extradite Chile's former dictator Augusto Pinochet from London to Spain a few years ago, but he looks elsewhere when Basque detainees are brought in front of him covered in bruises or with signs of deep psychological shock after the customary five day incommunicado period of interrogation (4 Basque detainees have died in police custody since Spanish "democracy" began).

In the last 7 years Judge Garzon has been dismantling various nationalist left organizations and Basque media, arguing that at the end of the day they are all ETA. He has arrested and put in jail some 200 people. No matter how little evidence he has to support his comprehensive theories, the trial had to begin last month, since under Spanish law the authorities can hold a prisoner on remand for up to four years. In fact, nine of the accused youths had to be released from jail last Friday, for they completed their remand period without being tried. They are now awaiting the result of this show trial together with another 33 youths. They are all accused of belonging to their respective youth organizations, which the judge argues are part of ETA. They could get up to 654 years in total.

Since freedom of association was finally recognized by the Spanish state in the late seventies after dictatorship, the Basque nationalist left youth organization Jarrai and its successors Haika and Segi have been working for better conditions for the youth, for promoting alternative ways of life like the Gaztetxes (self-managed centres for the youth), against conscription, etc.

This is not a criminal case but a political one where the accusations are collective, not based on individual acts. By Judge Garzon's standards tens of thousands of Basque people could be imprisoned any time. So far he has got some of the more determined and committed to achieve a free Basque Country. Ironically, some of those 200 people to be tried in the near future have publicly criticized ETA through the years.

In Belfast, the spokeswoman for the campaign asked for international support to stop the Spanish ad French States ferocious repression against Basque civil and political rights activists and Basque left wing pro-independence movement.

At the same time she denounced the silence of the Irish government and the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern during the time that Ireland held the European Union Presidency last year. The EU should not support such illegal and antidemocratic policies within the union but it should rather help to initiate a peace process in the Basque Country aimed to bring justice and freedom.

These protests were coordinated by the Irish Basque Committees-Coistí na mBascach-Éireannach and Ógra Shinn Féin and supported by numerous people and groups like ex-republican political prisoners, Belfast Socialist Youth and Irish Republican Socialist Party.

We want to thank everybody for coming along.

The solidarity campaign will keep going strong for the next few weeks with more events. These issues are of concern to anyone who stands for human rights such as freedom of organization and expression. Anybody who wants to join the campaign can contact us through: irishbasques@hotmail.com

.... ... .

No Euskera for You!

On one more dramatic turn of events, the defendants in the case against the Basque youth organizations were told not to speak Euskera, since Spanish is the official language in Spain.

Berria tells us that this comes as a result of the inability of the interpretors to do their job correctly what the defendants are saying:

“Article 3 of the Spanish Constitution says that Spanish is the official language and only those who cannot speak it are entitled to an interpreter. All of you can speak Spanish here, so you will have to speak in Spanish! That is the language you have to use in this trial!” Judge Alfonso Guevara pointed out during his outburst provoked by a fit of bad temper that whoever decided to speak in Basque could find that it affected their right to defence, because of the “personal decision” taken by the judge himself.

These fellas are being accused of supporting terrorism just because they are Basque and they are active in politics, they are speaking Euskera because they are making a point, now a judge tells them that if they speak their own language, a language that can be considered an endangered language, then they should not expect justice to work for them 100%.

The accused already know that if you are Basque justice in Spain does not work 100% for you.

You can read the whole article here.

Also, for complete coverage by Berria follow this links:

Translation vs Right to Proper Defence

Indictees Say Jarrai and Haika Have no Links with ETA

Judge Dismisses Defence's Request and Gets On with Trial

.... ... .

In Behalf of Haika, Segi and Jarrai

Support

A man holds up a banner as a fellow protester (red shirt, front) shouts slogans as the two men burst into the plenary room and disrupt the parliamentary proceedings, at the regional parliament in Vitoria, February 17, 2005. The two protesters shouted slogans in favour of Basque nationalist left youth organizations, and held up banners, while at least five others shouted slogans from the public gallery. Members of Basque nationalist left youth organizations Jarrai, Haika and Segi are currently being tried at Madrid's High Court, accused of being members of the Basque separatist group ETA or of aiding and abetting ETA. REUTERS/Vincent West

.... ... .

In Support of Youth Organizations

Arrest

Basque police detain a woman following a disruption in the regional parliament in Vitoria, northern Spain, February 17, 2005. Two men burst into the plenary room and disrupted the parliamentary proceedings, shouting slogans in favour of Basque nationalist left youth organisations, and holding up banners, while at least five others shouted slogans from the public gallery. Members of Basque nationalist left youth organisations Jarrai, Haika and Segi are currently being tried at Madrid's High Court, accused of being members of the Basque separatist group ETA or of aiding and abetting ETA. REUTERS/Vincent West

.... ... .

Clamp Down on Batasuna

Aznar may be gone, but his legacy is still providing scumbags like Baltasar Garzón with the perfect excuse to attack members of a political party and accuse them of working for ETA.

And after two years of "investigation" he backs up his hypothesis with theories, how professional of him.

Here is the note at Berria that depicts the last Garzonada:

Garzon charges 36 Batasuna members with being ETA members

In a 267-page indictment the judge confirms his hypothesis put forward in the 18/98 Case and includes all the organisations of the Basque National Liberation Movement within the armed organisation “in one way or another”

Aitziber Laskibar – BILBO

Baltasar Garzon, the Spanish National Criminal Court judge, issued his indictment yesterday on the 35/02 case relating to Batasuna and the Herriko Tabernas. In it Garzon pursues the same line of argument as in the legal proceedings instituted in the 18/98 Case and maintains that all the organisations within the Basque National Liberation Movement (ENAM) are, “in one way or another”, part of the armed organisation, On the basis of this argument Garzon has indicted 36 members of the HB, Euskal Herritarrok and Batasuna, accusing them of “being members of a terrorist organisation”. The indictment is 267 pages long and in it Garzon develops his arguments at length. The 36 people concerned have been summonsed to the Spanish National Criminal Court on Monday morning to have their charges read out to them.

Judge Garzon has also decided to maintain the precautionary measures which have hitherto been in place. So apart from the freezing of Batasuna’s accounts, the seizure of the Herriko Tabernas remains in force. The judge believes that the indictees committed crimes through the Herriko Tabernas, and that is why he deduces that they are ETA members.

The indictees also include members of the BAC-Basque Autonomous Community Parliament, but they cannot be indicted and tried by the National Criminal Court. So the Judge of the 5th Examining Court of the National Criminal Court has requested the High Court of the BAC to start proceedings against them.

Garzon has used two main arguments to say that Batasuna members are members of ETA: a political and an economic one. He says that in both these spheres all the organisations in the ENAM operate within “the same parameters” and that puts them all inside ETA. This argument begins with a sentence on the first pages of the indictment made public yesterday: “ETA has not only used HB, EH and Batasuna in the political and institutional sphere, it has also used them in the economic sphere for its funding.”

In the case against Batasuna, Garzon has included the same analysis that he made concerning the funding of the ENAM in the 18/98 Case, in the one against the Pro-Amnesty Committees (AAB), in the case against Haika and Segi (Basque nationalist left youth movements) and in the Udalbiltza case. He considers the AEK, the HB, the AAB and a number of companies to be “large companies” of the ENAM. He says that the stands (set up to sell refreshments during local fêtes), the sale of materials of the organisations, the membership fees and draws all constitute sources of funding for all of them.

.... ... .

Attack on Young People

Like I've said before many times, Madrid thinks that anything and everything Basque means terrorism.

The last victims of the repression?

Youth organizations.

Yup, while other countries complain that their youth refuses to engage with the rest of the society in order to build a better present and plan for the future, the Spanish authorities stomp on the rights of the Basque youth to gather and implement programs that will provide young Basques with spaces were to develop their interests.

Once again, without any evidence, on the "one fits all" charge of terrorism, the Spanish Courts sentence Basques to years and years of jail time.

State violence, that is how is called.

Here is a note that appeared today at Berria regarding this new case of opression:

Indictees say case is attack on all young Basque people

They believe the response also has to be big and are planning to start talks with young people’s groups

Aitziber Laskibar – BILBO

“654 years is the penalty they want to make us pay for creating and developing the tools needed to build the Basque Country. In this country 654 years is the price exacted for engaging in the struggle against the job insecurity we young people suffer, or for fighting for our own education system. In this country it is a crime to build a Basque Country made up of seven provinces. In this country the 654 years requested by the Public Prosecutor is the price for setting up communication projects for young people, for regaining linguistic rights, for promoting leisure activities, a spirit of criticism, and alternative life styles in the youth centres, and for working in favour of gender equality.” This was the reaction expressed yesterday by the people indicted in the case involving the Haika and Segi Basque nationalist left youth organisations to the penalties that the Prosecutor of the Spanish National Criminal Court is requesting.

The indictees say the Court regards the 42 people who have been working in these spheres as criminals; the court is, in fact, aiming to pass judgement on the work done by young peoples’ organisations over the last 25 years. This is why they are saying that it is an assault on all Basque youth and on the whole of the Basque Country. They therefore believe that the response should be on the same scale: “All young Basque people have to respond to this situation,” explained Markel Ormazabal, on behalf on the indictees.

Ormazabal said they would therefore be holding a series of talks with youth organisations “to unite as many forces as possible in the face of an assault of such proportions, and to send a clear message to the [Spanish and French] States that they will not achieve their aims as far as Basque youth is concerned”. So the indictees are planning to meet “with as wide a range of organisations as possible”, explained Ibon Meñika.

However, the young people want to take this beyond mere talks. “What we want is for all young people to express themselves alongside us; we want to respond to this situation brought about by the States by uniting the maximum number of forces in order to channel the denunciation by all kinds of young people.” So this is what the indictees will be asking of the young people working in different fields: to give a united response to the Haika-Segi case. Yesterday’s press conference was the initial response of the young and not so young to the support they are demanding. The indictees were joined by representatives of many different organisations expressing their support. There were about 80 people behind the seven indictees during yesterday’s press conference.

.... ... .