>Trying to secede in a country where secession is illegal, is... you know... a crime.
This tone is baffling to me. I don't think anybody is surprised that countries dislike secession.
>Also, please downvote me. Actual statement of facts aren't welcomed here.
I don't claim to speak for "here", but, personally, this pettiness at the end of your comment is what I'd like most to be absent from HN.
Not at all, and failing to do so can be itself a crime.
https://law.jrank.org/pages/1870/Prosecution-Prosecutorial-D...
“The legality principle commands that every case in which there is enough evidence and in which no legal hindrances prohibit prosecution has to be brought to court. Adherence to the legality principle in the procedural sense means that the prosecution service cannot exercise any discretion over the prosecutorial decision. Its role is limited to the legal assessment of the sufficiency of the evidence against the suspect. Other considerations – what are known as public interest factors in opportunity systems – are not considered as factors that prosecutors are allowed to deploy in their decisions. Rather, the public interest is regarded as a consideration for the court which might be reflected in the verdict or the penalty imposed.”
http://www.law.gov.cy/law/lawoffice.nsf/0/A5FCDD28D5A9112CC2...
Ironically, you are patently wrong.
As the other poster mentions, mandatory prosecution exists in many parts of the world, and Spain is indeed one of these places.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2... is the clearest English-language reference I can find. Specifically:
> The Member States’ criminal systems are divided on the issue of mandatory or discretionary prosecution. The discretionary principle is applied in Belgium, France, Denmark, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. In Germany, Austria, Spain, Finland, Sweden, Greece, Italy and Portugal the mandatory prosecution principle applies.
> The mandatory prosecution principle is that the prosecution authorities must act – even if no complaint has been lodged – where they suspect that an offence has been committed.
Prosecuting this is not optional.
That's not to say the government could not have applied pressure somehow if they wished of course (though in theory that's strongly discouraged), or even attempted to change the law entirely. Doing so publicly in any way though would pretty seriously harm their election changes on a national level (election is coming on November 11th).
I'm from the US and I find the notion of mandatory prosecution nonsensical. There is a limit to the workload a prosecutor can handle and prioritizing crimes is just one way to make sure more serious crimes get the manpower needed to prosecute.
But thank you for pointing out that, also, the laws can always be changed which ultimately is political.