Talk for Article "Catalonia votes in key election; Facebook signs deal with Universal"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    In order to expose accurate though unbiased information a couple of details on the treatment of the Catalonia’s issue:

    1) “A regional election that could reignite the crisis in Spain”. It is a regional election, that’s fully correct. But it is quite far from being the starter of a new crisis. The probable worst case could be a hung parliament and … new election in a few months with emotions cooled.

    2) The “controversial independence referendum” that Rajoy “said was an illegal referendum”. It was not Rajoy but de Constitutional Court who declared that attempt to perform a secession referendum unconstitutional as it invaded state powers and violated the supremacy of the Constitution.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)
      DU
      Deleted User

      Thanks Luis, we’ll look at this now.

      1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        Hi Luis, thanks for your comment. Regarding your first point: it’s my understanding that if the separatist bloc were to win a majority and decide to keep pursuing independence via unilateral or bilateral means, the Spanish state wouldn’t be amenable to either strategy and that would risk prolonging, or even renewing under a different form, the constitutional/independence crisis.

        Regarding your second point: you’re absolutely right in saying that it was Spain’s Constitutional Court, not Mariano Rajoy, who deemed the law that led to the October referendum as illegal. However, Rajoy did also say that the referendum was illegal before it took place. Here’s a link: http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170913/431258503544/rajoy-referendum-mesas-no-ir-ilegal.html

        1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

          Dear Mr Engels,

          Luis Fernando Torrijos is spot on on the two “details” he’s mentioned as well as pointing out yesterday how “forced” the use of “post-fascist integrity” in the article was. And “forced”, I believe, was being diplomatic.

          I am thoroughly enjoying the articles in this new medium, but as it is precisely based on factual information, why not making reference first to the decision from the Constitutional court (dated 7 September 2017; https://politica.elpais.com/politica/2017/09/07/actualidad/1504781825_809788.html) instead of resorting to some declarations from Mr Rajoy from 13 September? The whole sentence of the Constitutional Court can be found here: https://www.tribunalconstitucional.es/NotasDePrensaDocumentos/NP_2017_074/2017-4334STC.pdf

          The sentence of the Constitutional Court demonstrated the illegaility of the referendum. What exacty are you suggesting by making reference to Mr Rajoy’s comment?

        2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

          Since you both agree that the Constitutional Court of Spain deemed the referendum to be illegal, I’ve added that in the appropriate place, as a link to the Wikipedia entry.

          The reason I see this as relevant is that a politician saying something is illegal may be ascribed to purely political posturing. The Constitutional Court saying it certainly changes the tone.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us