The decision by the Catalan Parliament's Bureau to maintain the seat of Pau Juvillà, CUP deputy for the Lleida constituency, and thus not follow the instruction given by Spain's Central Electoral Commission while also appealing the case to the Supreme Court, is a wise decision. It conforms to the law and corrects, as much as possible, the gaping error made by the previous Bureau when, without leaving any option, it precipitated the loss of the seat of the then Catalan president, Quim Torra. The determination of the current speaker of parliament, Laura Borràs, has this time had the support of ERC, Junts, the CUP and the Comuns - and even the PSC has abstained, leaving all alone on the 'no' side the three right-wing parties as ever: Vox, Ciudadanos and the PP.
Although there is no doubt that the Supreme Court will end up validating the decision first of the Catalan High Court (TSJC) and later of the electoral board and Juvillà will be forced to give up his seat unless the Bureau of Parliament carries out an act of contempt of court - which seems difficult, but we will have to wait until the time comes to find out whether it is or not - what is reckless and politically nefarious would be to abandon the prospect of taking any judicial action. The arbitrariness of the TSJC convicting the now-MP Juvillà for having yellow ribbons hung in his window at the Lleida town hall building can only be understood in the framework of the repression of the Catalan independence movement. There is no other plausible explanation and it makes perfect sense not to simply surrender to the Spanish justice system but rather to try and complete a new dossier that might be substantiated by European justice in the future.
Given what the Bureau of the Parliament has done to preserve Juvillà's seat, it seems almost inexplicable what happened to Quim Torra and how the president of the Generalitat's parliamentary seat was delivered on a tray by the second most important institution in Catalonia just on two years ago. It is also difficult to understand that Junts was left alone defending the continuance of the parliamentary rights of president Torra and that it was the secretary general of the Parliament, Xavier Muro, who instructed the chamber's legal services to immediately withdraw his seat. It would be worthwhile to find out why, in the previous Bureau, ERC and the PSC - which along with Junts and Ciudadanos were the only parties represented in the house's governing body - did not maintain a position identical to the one they now hold in the case of Juvillà; or why the Comuns and the CUP, which were not in the Bureau but did have parliamentary representation, did not do the same.
Politics involves, and this is not the first case, doing and undoing. This is seen in the grim issue of the Parliament's Age Leave regime that has become a way for civil servants to retire at the age of 60, keeping their salaries intact, and not having to go back to work yet keeping their place. All this at an annual cost of 1.7 million euros, that no one has been able to explain without blushing deeply and apologizing. This scheme has been in force for thirteen years, across the terms of four parliamentary speakers, before being brought to an end now. Why did it all happen? How is it that the information wasn't made available? Why so much opacity? This is what creates disaffection and rectifying it is welcome even if it comes too late.