> As long as Spain's judiciary still sees it fit to hand out multi-year sentences to people peacefully following democratic principles, they seem very much an extension of the government and not an independent body.

There's nothing in that paragraph that qualifies as an argument against the separation of powers. In fact, I'd say that's pretty much the opposite, considering that PSOE has been pressuring for lower sentences.

There are such arguments, like how the Constitutional Court judges are elected, but in the end it's up to the Judiciary branch to decide what to do about, and nobody can interfere.

> As long as Spain's judiciary still sees it fit to hand out multi-year sentences to people peacefully following democratic principles, they seem very much an extension of the government and not an independent body.

The judiciary follows the laws, which are written by the senate, which is elected by the spanish people.

So those "people peacefully following democratic principles" being arrested is the will of the Spanish people. If they don't like it, they should have voted better.

Its very easy to just say to vote better. But when there is as much corruption in the government as there is in Spain its not that easy. When all the parties are "crap", then who do you vote for? If they make it too hard to start a party that goes against the current government, to the point of shutting down the government for over a year, then you can easily see that its not that simple.

Sentencing is a judges prerogative, yes? So draconian sentencing is not so inevitable as that?

A judge is required to act according to the law. Not following because they disagree with it is not an option on any modern democracy.

Sentencing is a judges prerogative. There can be guidelines, but that's all they are.