The Government demands to maintain the vote of those nationalized by the grandchildren's law

The Government asks the Supreme Court not to suspend the vote of new nationals by the grandchildren's law and rejects that there is a real electoral risk in the increase of the CERA.

2 minutes

fotonoticia 20260907130325 1920

fotonoticia 20260907130325 1920

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

2 minutes

Most read

The State Attorney's Office has claimed this Monday before the Supreme Court that the precautionary suspension requested by Vox and Iustitia Europa regarding the registrations in the Electoral Census of Absent Residents (CERA) linked to the known as "grandchildren's law" should be rejected, understanding that such a measure would violate the "right to active suffrage, a fundamental right recognized in the Constitution."

"How could judicial rights be denied to people who have acquired nationality through firm administrative acts?" exclaimed the State lawyer during the public hearing convened by the high court to examine the possible electoral effects of the provision of the Democratic Memory Law that opens the way to nationality for descendants of exiles.

The Supreme Court decided to initiate a separate piece of precautionary measures to assess the requested suspension and requested from the Central Electoral Board (JEC) the corresponding administrative file, after Iustitia Europa appealed a resolution from the JEC that had rejected the precautionary suspension of the procedure for the preparation of the CERA.

The Government's representation has defended that the registration in the CERA "is simply a subsequent consequence of this date of acquisition of nationality."

In her intervention, the State lawyer accused Vox and Iustitia Europa of "procedural deviation," arguing that, in their case, the appeal should be directed "against the acquisition of nationality, but not against its legal consequences, such as registration in the CERA," reiterating that the challenge must be declared inadmissible.

The defense of the Executive has emphasized that the annotation in the electoral census "does not include the manner of acquisition of nationality," and reproached the appellants for attempting to differentiate "those Spaniards who have acquired nationality as a consequence of democratic memory and the institution."

Furthermore, the State Attorney's Office has insisted that it has not been demonstrated that the increase in the census "will produce a real creation of results from a group of electoral processes," so that, in its opinion, the appealing party "is based exclusively on hypothetical and eventual risks."

Consequently, the Government has requested that the inadmissibility of the appeal be declared and, subsidiarily, that the precautionary measures requested by the plaintiffs be dismissed.

Hola, soy Fren. ¿Cómo te ayudo?