The president of the Identitarios political party, José Ignacio Vega, has been exonerated by the Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife of a charge of inciting hatred or discrimination based on race due to insufficient evidence.
The verdict, released this Thursday, acknowledges that Vega was involved in the Telegram channel named Canary Islands demonstrations against immigration where racist remarks aimed at migrants were made. However, the court concluded that he was not the creator of the content and his involvement was limited to sharing a video featuring an interview.
He later disassociated himself from the group and during the trial, he mentioned that the members called each other derogatory terms and that he was not acquainted with the rest of the users (more than 70 individuals) and whether they were affiliated with his political organization.
The trial established that Vega organized a demonstration in Santa Cruz de Tenerife on November 21, 2020 under the slogans Go to the demonstration, let’s save our identity and Without integration there is no immigration, which concluded without any incidents or disparaging remarks on social media.
Meanwhile, various messages were published in the Telegram group such as “the only difference between a Moor and me is going to be that he is a religious fanatic murderer, I am going to be a freedom-loving murderer”, “if for outside I armed myself right now and started shooting” or “no, neither in the Canary Islands, nor in Spain nor in Europe, these people spread like the plague, and since they are not able to control them we have to exterminate them”, among others.
The ruling indicates that the call for the demonstration was “legal” and at the same time, it criticises the “meagre and brief” judicial investigation in clarifying the facts as there was no effort to obtain the date of creation and complete identification of the creator, owner, administrators and participants of the Telegram group.
“These omissions have prevented criminal proceedings from being taken to prosecute those directly responsible for the aforementioned messages,” it contends.
It also asserts that holding the position of president of a political party does not make an individual “directly and without the need for proof of guilt,” criminally liable for the comments made on his social networks, especially when it is not known who managed the party profiles.
Political dissent is not unlawful
Furthermore, the verdict emphasises that merely organizing a demonstration with the aim of disseminating and promoting a “potential approach” to the issue of irregular immigration in a manner distinct from that of the authorities “does not in itself constitute a form of incitement to make violent and racist comments.”
In line with several rulings of the Constitutional Court, “political dissent about the manner to resolve the diverse problems and challenges that a society encounters, as long as it is conducted within the constitutional and legal framework, does not entail criminal or illegal activity outside the scope of the law.”
An appeal against the verdict, which is not final, can be filed before the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC).
