Fines up to 9900 euros for the seven accused of coacciones contra el proyecto Aroztegia

The head of Criminal Court No. 3 in Pamplona has imposed a fine of between 5,850 and 9,450 euros on the seven accusedof continuing coercion for acts of protest against the works of the Baztan Carpentry Project in April 2021. 

However, the judge acquitts them ofthe crime of criminal group charged with the charges, and the sentence may be appealed to the Provincial High Court.

Taking into account the number of times each of the accused has been identified in the facts, the magistrate has sentenced them to a fine of 15 euros a day, ranging from 5,850 euros to 9,900 euros.

In addition, as civil liability, the defendants must compensate Explotaciones Forestales Queipo, S.L. and Obras y Servicios Tex, S.L. for the amount determined in the execution of the sentence for damages caused by the paralysis of the machines on 8, 9, 16 and 20 April 2021.

According to the judgement, the defendants who opposed the Aroztegia Palace project and other people in the valley decided to try to block the start of the works and the development of the project.

"Since the commencement of the work, and with the clear intention of preventing the commencement of the work and the progress of the clearing work, an indeterminate number of persons, including those prosecuted, have committed acts of intimidation against the workers in order to obtain a halt to the work, and have stood in front of the machines to prevent them from carrying out the work entrusted to them," the court says.

Acquitted of criminal gang charges

During the trial last May, both the Public Prosecutor's Office and the indictments described the facts as a criminal group offence and continued coercion. The prosecutor requested one year's imprisonment for the first offence and 22 months for the second, resulting in a total of 34 months' imprisonment.

After examining "numerous evidence of witnesses and documents", the judge concludes that the existence of a crime of a criminal group cannot be established, since consent is "essential" for this purpose.

The investigation focused on analysing the videos and frames obtained by some of the plaintiffs, as well as the graphic materials released by the project, admitted as documentary evidence in the case. Some of them were reproduced during the oral hearing and a large number of persons were identified; the indictment focused on those who were found to have been involved in the protests for several days.

The Magistrate explains that the prosecution emphasizes that the former mayor of the Baztan Valley was the leader of the violent acts, that he gave orders and instructions, that he organized shifts and that he shared functions. The Judge denies that these acts were proven. Being the interlocutor of the videos, being interviewed, is not sufficient evidence to determine that this person gave instructions for the organization or conduct of violent acts.

Forced to stop a legal job

On the other hand, he considers it proven that the accused committed coercion, a crime against liberty, which is to hinder another person from doing what he pleases. "In this case, the work was prevented, the workers were forced to abandon their duties, and to leave the place, as seen in the graphic materials attached to the author, and as several witnesses of the prosecution testified at the trial," says the magistrate.

In his opinion, the sudden arrival of a large group of people in the works, their dangerous entry into the field without permission and their dangerous approach to the machines, caused fear among the workers, whether they were concerned for the welfare of themselves, of their colleagues, and forced them to abandon a legitimate job, seeing that they were repeatedly suspended.

The judge considers that such acts should be punishable by a fine rather than a prison sentence, since he considers that the prison penalty should be reserved for cases of greater importance: "In this case, even if the facts are considered to be a coercive offence, I believe that the penalty of a fine should be applied because no violence or serious intimidation has been used to legitimize the application of prison sentences."