The Ghali case , in which the entry of the leader of the Polisario Front, Brahim Ghali, into Spain on April 18, is not closed. This has been decided by the magistrate of the Court of Instruction Number 7 of Zaragoza, Rafael Lasala , who has rejected the request for dismissal of the State Bar. The judge understands that he would proceed to the file if ‘the material fact’ [the entry of Ghali] were non-existent .
“In addition, he warns that the Government violated the Schengen Code, which establishes the rules on the crossing of people through the external borders of the European Union (EU) and the absence of border controls at internal borders, and also that the residence permit of the Polisario leader was issued when he had alreadyfive days admitted to the Hospital of Logroño , where he went to recover from the coronavirus infection.
The State Attorney, in charge of the defense of the accused former Foreign Minister, Arancha González Laya, requested the dismissal of the case on September 17 when it understood that the secret entry of the Polisario leader did not lead to the commission of the crimes of prevarication, documentary falsification and concealment .
The Prosecutor’s Office and the private prosecution have already rejected his request, but now it is the judge who sentences him. In a car to which he has had access for 20Minutos, Lasala ugly at the Legal Profession seeking an ” interested dismissal . ” This could only happen, he says, “in the event that the material ‘fact’ was non-existent, something that is not the case, since even the requesting party acknowledges that it has existed”.
The magistrate also dismisses as “very partial” the invocation made by Laya’s defense of several articles of the Schengen Borders Code, according to which Member States are allowed to exempt from the obligation to cross external borders. In Lasala’s opinion, the precepts that are indicated “ have not been fulfilled ”, since he recalls that this document says that there should be no “conflict of interests of public order or internal security” when said entries are made.
The Lawyers also hide behind the fact that another Schengen precept marks that can be adopted for a traveler when it is for “humanitarian reasons” – the main justification with which the Executive defended the entry of Ghali, which involved a high intensity diplomatic conflict with Morocco-.
However, the judge points out that the defense “obvious” that this article also indicates that when a “national of a third country” is registered as “inadmissible”, the rest of the Schengen States must be informed. ” Not only has it not been done, but it has also been recognized that it has not wanted to be done, ” says the car.
In addition, Lasala rejects that the entry of Ghali was endorsed by the bilateral Agreement between Spain and Algeria, which allows entry to diplomatic passport holders without a visa. “It does not imply without control . What is being prosecuted here is whether [the passport] was shown and controlled, ”continues the judge.
However, the magistrate recalls that the case also investigates whether the entry of Ghali without a passport “could have the purpose of avoiding legal problems.” It should be remembered that, when he arrived, Ghali was being investigated by the National High Court for genocide, although finally Judge Santiago Pedraz concluded the case without charging him as there were no indications. “Neither does the omission of passport control help by leaving the door open to the hypothesis that he could enter with false documentation or that it could cause problems,” says Lasala.
In this sense, it makes references to police information that indicates that the name of Ghali’s residence permit is different from that of his ID . Thus, the probabilities that this identity variation are a “fluke” are “minimized”. Finally, it adds that the residence card with which Ghali entered on April 18, which belonged to his son, was issued on the 23rd of that month, five days after entering Spanish territory.