Journalisme indépendantINFORMACIONS.Andorre · Europe · Monde
Ordre original de la liste
ANDORRA LEGAL CASE STUDIES | Justice, Power and the Right of Defence.
This playlist brings together investigative podcasts and legal case studies about justice, law and institutional power in Andorra. Each episode examines a different case through publicly available judgments, court orders, legislation, official documents and verified journalistic sources.
The collection covers constitutional, criminal, civil, administrative and human-rights disputes involving citizens, lawyers, judges, prosecutors and Andorran institutions. Its purpose is not to impose a predetermined verdict, but to explain the facts, reconstruct the legal arguments, examine the institutional response and identify the questions that may remain unresolved.
Documented facts, allegations, procedural positions, judicial findings, journalistic information and analytical conclusions are treated as different categories. A complaint is not a conviction, an appeal is not proof and an inadmissibility is not necessarily a decision on the merits.
These podcasts are created for anyone who wants to listen to, understand and debate real legal cases from Andorra, including law students, universities, professors, lawyers, researchers, journalists and the general public.
European jurisprudence may be used as a comparative framework, but Andorra and its legal system always remain at the centre of the analysis.
Listen, examine the evidence and reach your own conclusions.
Independent documentary analysis conducted using Blaxxun agentic artificial intelligence under the editorial responsibility of Josep Guirao.
What happens to the right of defence when a lawyer who criticizes a judge, prosecutor, police officer or state expert can be fined, prosecuted, disciplined—or permanently removed from the profession—by that same system?
This documentary podcast examines 18 legal cases connected to Andorran lawyer Emili Campos and asks a difficult question: when does persistent and combative legal defence become a threat to institutional stability, and when does the institutional response risk becoming a mechanism for containing an uncomfortable lawyer?