The defense of Balti Picornell appeals that the case continues even though the Public Prosecutor's Office requested its archiving

PalmaThe defense for Balti Picornell filed an appeal this Wednesday against the interlocutory order of September 16th, which agreed to continue the case opened against the former Speaker of the Parliament, Balti Picornell, through the abbreviated procedure following the complaint filed by the Vox deputy in Congress, Jorge Campos. The defense, led by Acció Cassandra, asks the Provincial Court of Palma to revoke the resolution and agree to the dismissal of the proceedings, after the Prosecutor's Office had previously requested the provisional archiving of the case.

The investigating judge, however, has decided to continue the case, finding "rational indications" of the existence of an alleged crime of serious insults with publicity. The interlocutory order now gives the parties ten days to present their respective accusation or dismissal briefs or, exceptionally, to request complementary proceedings.

The case was initiated due to some posts by Picornell on social media after Campos filed a complaint regarding a photograph that the former President of the Parliament had allegedly disseminated repeatedly and in which the expression "J. Campos fucking nazi" could be read.

One of the central elements of the interlocutory order is that the judge disagrees with the criterion maintained by the Public Prosecutor's Office, which had requested the provisional archiving of the case, considering that Picornell's expressions were protected by freedom of speech.

The judge considers, on the other hand, that labeling a person a "nazi" is not a neutral political category, nor a simple ideological ascription. This qualification implies associating a specific person with "an ideology historically linked to totalitarianism, the systematic persecution of human beings for racial, ethnic, religious or ideological motives, and the commission of very serious violations of human rights".

In this sense, the magistrate considers that the expression used by Picornell is "objectively capable of seriously affecting the social reputation of the recipient" and that "it cannot be considered a simple innocuous manifestation of political disagreement".

Political criticism

The defense, led by Acció Cassandra, argues, on the other hand, that Picornell's statements must be examined in accordance with the reinforced protection of freedom of expression, especially because they occurred in the context of a political confrontation on social networks.

The appeal maintains that the questioned expressions are value judgments, provocative expressions, and forms of political criticism directed against a public representative, and that they do not describe any specific criminal act. The lawsuit had already been appealed previously by the defense before the Provincial Court. In June, Acció Cassandra challenged the admission for processing agreed upon by the court and maintained that the questioned expressions were framed within a political and ideological debate.

The Public Prosecutor's Office had requested the dismissal

One of the central arguments of the new appeal is precisely the criterion maintained by the Public Prosecutor's Office during the investigation. According to the defense, the Prosecutor's Office considered that Picornell's publications did not reach the necessary severity to justify a criminal response and requested their provisional dismissal.

The Public Prosecutor's Office would also have remarked that the publications had to be assessed in their context and not in isolation. According to this interpretation, a good part of Picornell's messages were replies to Campos's publications and occurred in a climate of mutual hostility between both. The defense recalls that criminal intervention in matters of slander has an exceptional character and demands that, when the expressions affect a political representative and occur within the framework of a public debate, the reinforced protection of freedom of expression be taken into account.

The focus on a publication by Campos

The Acció Cassandra document also focuses on one of Jorge Campos's posts that were part of the context of the case.

It is a message in which the Vox deputy shared the poster for a Catalanist mobilization and wrote: "On this day we know that, in Palma, the pan-Catalanist separatists are all in the same place. These opportunities should be taken advantage of". The message had been published in the context of the 2025 Diada de Mallorca and generated various political reactions.

According to the defense's account, Picornell responded to this post with the message 'Fascism must be fought. Now and always'. Acció Cassandra maintains that this context is relevant because, as it states, the Public Prosecutor's Office considered Campos's words to have a provocative and inciting character towards violence. The defense considers that this circumstance has not been adequately valued by the court when deciding on the continuation of the proceedings.

The Court still has to resolve another challenge

The defense also questions that the court has decided to move forward with the abbreviated procedure while an appeal filed against the initial admission of the complaint is still pending resolution before the Provincial Court of Palma.

For Acció Cassandra, this circumstance is especially relevant because the continuation of the procedure is taking place while a challenge regarding the very origin of the case is still pending resolution.

The appeal filed this Wednesday therefore requests that the Court revoke the interlocutory order of September 16 and decree the dismissal of the proceedings. The defense maintains that the investigated expressions must be framed within the exercise of freedom of expression and that they do not have the necessary criminal gravity to constitute a crime of serious slander with publicity.

Meanwhile, the court's interlocutory order opens the door to the continuation of the case through the abbreviated procedure and gives the parties ten days to set their position. The decision on whether the procedure finally continues towards the opening of an oral trial will remain conditioned on the actions carried out from now on and on the resolution of the pending appeals.