Text original publicat per No es época para tontos.
Can a magistrate with no publicly documented law degree serve as rapporteur in a constitutional case involving privacy, sensitive personal data, and fundamental rights?
This investigative podcast examines one of the most contradictory episodes in Andorran judicial reasoning: an alcohol-test result that the courts claimed was not health-related data, while simultaneously relying on a judicial order to justify access to information treated as sensitive.
Drawing on the court decisions, Andorra’s 2003 Data Protection Act, Council of Europe Convention 108, its explanatory report, and the later 2021 legislation, the episode exposes conflicting arguments, legal omissions, procedural evasions, and the distortion of what the defence actually claimed.
It is a long, acidic and satirical investigation into a justice system that appears to confuse interpreting the law with cultivating it in an institutional greenhouse. Fundamental rights are not potatoes, sensitive data cannot be stored in any judicial barn, and a law adopted in 2021 cannot be planted retroactively in an earlier lawsuit.
