The idea is beginning to take root that what defines Spain at the moment is its justice system. A handful of judges who, through their decisions, are at times sending the country into a certain state of shock, on other occasions pushing the loyalty among members of the EU to the limit, and in still others acting against the freedom of information or very far from the freedom of expression. All this is happening with such a frequency that it is difficult to understand the work occurring in some judicial areas; rather, there is the sensation that a kind of à la carte justice exists, and that is the worst that can happen in a state under the rule of law.
The decision of the Navarra regional court in the case of La Manada - the "wolf pack" - granting bail to the five men convicted of nine years jail for sexual abuse to a young woman, during the San Fermín bull-running festival in 2016, subject to a deposit of 6,000 euros, is an atrocity. And also an insult to women who are left vulnerable to chauvinistic violence everyday. For a decision of this magnitude to be taken just days before this year's San Fermín festival should give cause to reflect to all of those who have it within their power to revert situations like this. It is not the message that should be sent to society from the political and judicial powers and it cannot be separated from the sensation of impunity that has spread widely across different layers of society.
In spite of the gravity of the La Manada case, the last two days have also seen additional judicial situations that are not normal in other EU countries and which end up propagating the idea that the Spanish legal framework is very different from that found in the country's European neighbours. It is simply ignominious to compare the bail granted in this case - which according to the court was one of sexual abuse while for many legal experts it was clearly rape - with the indefinite remand in preventive prison for the nine Catalan pro-independence leaders relating to the protest of last 21st September outside Catalan economics ministry and the independence referendum on 1st October.
Moreover, the aberrant nature of this judicial framework is not seen only in the situation of the Catalan political prisoners, a grave anomaly in itself which is already receiving judicial correction or amendment abroad even if that doesn't affect those currently held in three Madrid prisons. By way of example, the response of the senior judge in Madrid who has refused to process the citation presented by Belgian justice of Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena, a citation arising from a civil case laid by the exiled Catalan ministers in Brussels alleging that the judge has failed to be impartial. It is not that a judicial ruling has been made on the matter, but rather that the senior Madrid judge has simply said it is "not valid", fullstop.
Also in the last day, we have seen a verdict that disqualifies the mayor of Berga, Montserrat Venturós, of the CUP party, from holding office for six months for failing to remove an estelada - a Catalan pro-independence flag - from her town hall. A sentence that is certainly surprising. It needs to be remembered that the case was initially dismissed by the court in Berga, and that the flag incident took place in 2015. Now, thanks to an appeal by the public prosecutor and a new ruling by the High Court of Catalonia she has been found guilty.
And we can close the list of eye-opening judicial actions with the charges brought against two journalists, Ignacio Escolar and Raquel Ejerique, of the digital newspaper Eldiario.es for an alleged offence of revealing secrets in the case of the former president of the Madrid region, Cristina Cifuentes. The work carried out by this newspaper in the case, which led to the resignation of Cifuentes, was decisive, and it is difficult to understand how the tide can be held back in such a case involving the reporting and publishing of news. And, finally, there is the dismissal by judge Carmen Lamela in Spain's National Audience court of the complaint in the Castor case for the disastrous construction of a underground gas reservoir.
The Spanish judiciary needed only twenty-four hours for all of these decisions. Sufficient for concern that amounts to something more than a mere anecdote.