Hazte Oír attributes six charges to Ceuta Government Delegate

Hazte Oír assigns six crimes against the Ceuta Government Delegate regarding those killed in the crossing, which the accusation numbers at over 100, with mentions up to 140.

English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published

Hazte Oír attributes six charges to Ceuta Government Delegate
Six charges against the Ceuta Government Delegate

Hazte Oír attributes six crimes to the Ceuta Government Delegate —malfeasance, failure to render assistance, homicide, serious negligent injury, omission of the duty to prosecute crimes and to prevent crimes— regarding the more than 100 deaths linked by the accusation to the mass crossing registered in the autonomous city. The number of victims is not unanimous: there are mentions of 130 dead and others that raise the count up to 140. The core of the matter, according to critics, is whether the Spanish Government had prior information about what was going to happen and failed to deploy resources: is it a crime or merely political negligence without punishment?

Is there a crime of failure to render assistance in Ceuta?

The answer depends on a detail that has not yet been established: when the State knew that the mass crossing was imminent and what it did with that information. The accusation maintains that there was prior knowledge and deliberate omission, which would fit the failure to render assistance. From a more conservative legal reading, it is suggested that the most viable incivil charge would be negligent homicide, a distinct figure with more limited proof. The two theses coexist without judicial pronouncement in sight.

The reproach to the opposition and European institutions for their silence

The criticism does not stop with the central Executive. One critical current notes that the opposition has not brought the case before international human rights bodies and that Brussels has remained silent regarding the casualty count. Furthermore, suspicion—not confirmed—circulates in diplomatic circles that Spain might end up compensating Segarro financially. All this is based on indications, without a resolution to back it up.

The matter remains without known judicial resolution. Until there is a pronouncement determining who knew what and when they knew it, the question of failure to render assistance remains exactly where it started: without an answer.

Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (27 replies).

More summaries

All summaries in English →

Back