It’s not just the Pegasus, but the CNI and the Supreme Court magistrate, stupid!


The National Intelligence Center (CNI) spies, as we already know, and now it cannot hide that it spied on pro-independence leaders with judicial authorization. Magistrates of the supreme court they reject having given the green light to “massive” interventions & rdquor; telephone numbers of independence leaders.

Let’s be serious: what magistrate of the Supreme Court would have refused to authorize telephone interventions -presented as “punctual & rdquor; and “individualized” – at a request from the center, in 2017, to combat a sedition-rebellion in progress, CNI dixit, likely to affect the “indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation & rdquor; enshrined in article two of the Constitution?

The magistrate in charge of supervising the petitions of the CNI in the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court, paul lukeHe certainly would not have refused.

And he would not have resisted either if the request had fallen on the substitute for that task, Julian Sanchez Melgarmagistrate of the Second Chamber of said court.

hermetic binomial

The authorizations to violate fundamental rights by the CNI -home entry and telephone interventions- must be given, as of 2002, by a Supreme Court magistrate. Since 2009, it is paul luke. In 2019 he was re-elected for the third time, until 2024.

In this system there is only the CNI, which requests the measure, and the magistrate who authorizes it.

The Public Prosecutor’s Office, as we have already pointed out, does not have any participation in this binomial CNI-magistrate of the Supreme.

Therefore: the affected – the spied citizen– not complete at the time or later because the CNI does not contribute the material to any procedure.

In an ordinary proceeding, on the contrary, when the judge authorizes wiretapping, the fiscal Ministery, even if the proceedings are secret, he knows that authorization and can oppose them (before authorizing them if the judge asks for a report or after the green light). And the affected party will know it when the evidence of these interventions is provided to the judicial procedure.

But you won’t know that part in the case of the authorized interventions of the CNI. Because he uses that evidence in his investigation and does not present it as evidence in the case or trial.

Ergo: you will never be able to appeal them.

The mechanism of pegasusif possible, close this hermetic binomial CNI-magistrate of the Supreme.

most intrusive system

The system used until Pegasus, which is still the norm in the Ministry of the Interior, the Police and also the CNI – the so-called SITEL (Telephone Interception System)–, centralizes the information received from the intercept units that the telephone operators (TME, Amena, Vodafone and Telefónica de España) have incorporated into their networks.

Therefore, in this system there are third parties apart from the CNI and the Supreme Court. But, with the Pegasus, even those third parties have disappeared. Is a most intrusive system, allows you to activate the camera of a mobile phone, hijack messages, monitor meetings, control phones abroad. Without the affected person knowing.

“The system set up from 2002, during the Government of Jose Maria AznarIt was going to explode one day. And that is what has happened with the Pegasus and the CNI & rdquor ;, says a magistrate consulted by EL PERIÓDICO. “A clique cannot be created between the CNI and the magistrate because even when you absolutely trust his probity, he has to be subject to some kind of control. Because, otherwise, as is happening now, problems are created for the CNI or the magistrate. Or the CNI says that everything has been done under the control of the magistrate, but he cannot say much either because it is secret. If there is a prosecutor involved, it can be invoked that there is a report. It is a filter and a guarantee even for the judge.

The problem with the existing binomial CNI-magistrate of the Supremethe citizen is totally defenseless.

violated rights

If what the CNI had obtained, as has been pointed out, had been contributed to a procedure and the affected citizen brings negative consequencesthey could ask for the nullitybut when at no time what is obtained in the wiretaps is used as evidence, it is different.

The citizen could argue, now that the CNI seems to admit that he has spied, that his privacy Y right to confidentiality have been violated. But as the Constitution establishes that they can be violated with judicial authorization, here peace and later glory. Here there is judicial authorization and, therefore, there is no violation of rights. And, in addition, it can be pointed out that it has not been used against him.

Related news

It could also be argued that the Supreme Court magistrate will have assessed whether or not there were reasons to listen to the citizen.

the closed system CNI-magistrate of the Supremeindeed, it has exploded. The Pegasus has taken the situation to its extreme, given that the authorizing magistrate does not study the system used by the intelligence service.


Leave a Comment