File an appeal
BARCELONA, 13 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The judge who sent the footballer Dani Alves to provisional prison for allegedly raping a young woman on December 30 in the Sutton nightclub in Barcelona has rejected that the Catalan Federation of Restoration and Musical Activities Associations (Fecasarm) and the employers’ ocio nocturno Spain Nightlife are popular accusation in the case.
In the order, consulted this Monday by Europa Press, the judge has argued that they do not have sufficient legitimacy and that the employers have not “previously demonstrated their direct interest in the issue”, as they have to do -in her opinion- the entities that want to exercise public prosecution.
He has also pointed out that the Sutton nightclub acted diligently at all times, activating the protocol against sexual assault and harassment, so the image or reputation of the sector has not been damaged.
Thus, the nightlife employers have filed an appeal this Monday at 1:00 p.m. in which they show their “total disagreement” for having to demonstrate a direct interest in this case to appear as a popular accusation.
“Although this part is clear that the legal right protected from the crime prosecuted is the integrity and sexual freedom of the person attacked, crimes against sexual freedom are not private crimes, which is why any Spanish citizen can appear as a popular accusation, is not offended by the crime, that is, although he has not been directly affected by the crime in question,” they add in the appeal, collected by Europa Press.
They also clarify that, while the public prosecution has legitimacy derived from the right to participate in the administration of justice and does not need to affirm that he has been offended by the crime in order for the right to bring criminal action to be recognized, the private prosecution “derives of direct damage”.
“We cannot stop insisting on something that the judge ‘a quo’ has unfairly and inexplicably disregarded and that is that, among other purposes pursued by our association, is the general prevention of intimidation to avoid future similar actions in premises of nightlife or its surroundings, this being a collective interest that is not only legitimate but also commendable”, they have maintained.
Thus, they ask the judge to admit the appeal for processing and issue a new resolution so that it is agreed to accept the nightlife employers as a popular accusation.
