Court of Barcelona revokes Prosecutor’s request to analyze lawyer’s mobile in Pegasus software investigation

The Court of Barcelona has vetoed that the judicial police analyze the mobile of Andreu Van den Eynde, lawyer of the leader of ERC Oriol Junqueras, to investigate whether he was spied on with the Pegasus software, a test requested by the Prosecutor’s Office and to which the lawyer himself opposed.

In an order, to which EFE has had access, the Court of Barcelona has revoked the decision of the investigating judge to instruct the judicial police expert evidence on the scope of espionage on Andreu Van den Eynde’s phone and he has agreed with the lawyer, who refused to hand over his mobile.

It is not the only case in which Justice has agreed to require the supposedly infected mobiles to find out how much information could be extracted by the malware: the telephone number of the minister was also required Roger Torrent and the councilor of Barcelona Ernest Maragallof ERC, as well as to Gonzalo BoyeCarles Puigdemont’s lawyer, without their agreeing to hand him over.

Members of the CUP and Òmnium Cultural affected by espionage They have also refused to hand over their mobile phones to the court for analysis by the police.but they have offered to contribute a copy of the same certified by a notaryfrom which the data considered reserved are excluded, judicial sources have explained to EFE.

Espionage with Pegasus, software that the Israeli company NSO sells in principle only to States, affected more than 60 people from the pro-independence environment, in addition to the President of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, and the Minister Margarita Robles, some 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’ lawyer provided an expert report confirming that your mobile was infected between April and May 2020in full confinement, when he claims he held 16 sensitive meetings of political relevance.

The Prosecutor’s Office, however, asked the judge to request the mobile phone of the lawyer so that the judicial police carry out a computer expert in order to “complement” the one he had providedconsidering that Van den Eynde’s report does not clarify whether data was extracted from his phone nor does it provide elements to determine who is responsible for the events.

In its order, the Court maintains that does not see “necessary” this expansion of the computer expert requested by the Prosecutor’s Office, understanding that “simple unauthorized access to the data” of the lawyer’s telephone number would be a crime, regardless of its use.

In addition, the court recalls the “refusal” of the plaintiff to hand over his phone so that the data extraction test can be carried out, “without prejudice to the right that assists you” to expand said expert report if it 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 mobilealthough for the moment he rules out summoning the director of the CNI, Esperanza Casteleiro, to testify.

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.