The Court of Barcelona has vetoed the judicial police from analyzing the mobile phone of Andreu Van den Eynde, lawyer of the ERC leader Oriol Junqueras, to investigate whether he was spied on with the Pegasus software, a test requested by the Prosecutor's Office and which was opposed by himself lawyer.
In an order, to which EFE has had access, the Court of Barcelona has revoked the decision of the investigating judge to entrust the judicial police with an expert test on the scope of the espionage on the telephone of Andreu Van den Eynde and has agreed with the lawyer, who refused to hand over his mobile.
This is not the only case in which the Justice has agreed to request the supposedly infected mobile phones to find out how much information could be extracted by means of the malicious software: the phone was also required of the Minister Roger Torrent and the Barcelona councilor Ernest Maragall, from ERC, as well as to Gonzalo Boye, Carles Puigdemont's lawyer, without their agreeing to hand him over.
The members of the CUP and Òmnium Cultural affected by the espionage have also refused to hand over their cell phones to the court for analysis by the police, but they have offered to provide a copy of them certified by a notary, from which they exclude themselves. the data considered reserved, judicial sources have explained to EFE.
The espionage with Pegasus, a piece of software that the Israeli company NSO sells in principle only to States, affected more than 60 people from the pro-independence milieu, in addition to the
Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, and Minister Margarita Robles, infections that are being investigated in parallel in different courts, most of them in Catalonia.
In the complaint he filed for the attack on his phone, Junqueras's lawyer provided an expert report confirming that his mobile phone was infected between April and May 2020, in full lockdown, when he claims he held 16 sensitive meetings of political relevance.
The Prosecutor's Office, however, asked the judge to request the lawyer's motive so that the judicial police could carry out a computer expert in order to "complement" the one he had provided, considering that the Van den Eynde report did not It clarifies whether data was extracted from his phone or provides elements to determine the authorship of the facts.
In its order, the Court maintains that it does not see this extension of the computer expert requested by the Prosecutor's Office "necessary", understanding that "simple access to the data without consent" of the lawyer's telephone number would be a crime, regardless of its use.
In addition, the court recalls the "refusal" of the complainant to hand over his phone so that the data extraction test can be carried out, "without prejudice to his right" to expand said expert report if he deems it necessary.
On the other hand, the Court of Barcelona upholds the lawyer's appeal and orders the CNI to request information about the purchase of Pegasus and its possible use to spy on the complainant's mobile phone, although it rules out for the moment summoning the CNI director, Esperanza, to testify. Casteleiro.
The order also orders the instructor to summon the person in charge of the company OSY Technologies, part of NSO Group, as investigated, a procedure to which the prosecutor opposed, and to require documentation regarding clients who may have used Pegasus in Spain.
