I imagine that they'd have had different results if the referendum were about changing the law, but that's not what this was. This was specifically to violate the law.
Laws are intended to preserve convivence in society and secession is like a bomb put in the middle of the lifes, properties and projects of millions of people (Not necessarily for better. We have dozens of examples of how things can turn hairy easily for the population).
The argument can never be: must be allowed because currently is illegal, thus we must be lacking some good freedom here.
That's a solid argument.
The question is that in our democracy some themes are deemed illegal, and any web promoting them can be closed anytime and everytime, because this is how our laws work.
Spain has the fortune of being a melting pot of races and cultures in Europe. By our situation and history we have strong natural bonds with America, Europe and Africa. We have also suffered civil wars and dictatures and hate speech is seen as an specially disgusting thing by most spaniards. We know how this always end.
So, could be seen as "unjustifiable censorship" to close a web hypothetically hosting declarations like that?
The Andalusian has been hungry for hundreds of years and lives in a state of ignorance and cultural, spiritual and mental misery. (Jordi Pujol, ex-president of Catalonia and founder of the party currently in power, under a new name)
I have an clear opinion about that (this disgusting thing would be better closed for good ASAP), but let the judges clear if those webs were promoting hate speech and harassment towards more than half of the Catalonian people (not to mention the rest of spaniards), or not.