The border of Ceuta dawns without incidents and keeps the surveillance device active.

As of August 16, 2026, the reference regulation on immigration in Spain remains the Organic Law 4/2000, on the rights and freedoms of foreigners in Spain and their social integration. There is no comprehensive "new Immigration Law" in the final stages of processing nor a complete replacement of the current framework, but there are several partial reforms underway or recently approved that affect key aspects of the law.

1. Reform on unaccompanied migrant minors

The most advanced change block focuses on unaccompanied migrant minors and their distribution among communities:

• In March 2025, the Government approved Royal Decree-Law 2/2025, which modifies LO 4/2000 to regulate a mechanism of extraordinary migratory contingency and the automatic distribution of minors when a community exceeds three times its ordinary capacity (new art. 35 bis and related). The text was published in the BOE on March 19, 2025 (BOE 19/03/2025).
• The Congress ratified this decree-law and agreed to process it as a bill under the urgent procedure, to allow amendments. According to parliamentary information, the resulting bill (file 121/000055) keeps the amendment period open until September 2, 2026, so it is still formally in process.
• Various parliamentary reports describe this reform as the “law for the mandatory distribution of migrant minors,” already applied in practice after ratification, but pending its closure as an ordinary law.

In summary, the legal mechanism is already operational via decree-law, but the processing as a bill remains open in Congress to consolidate and possibly adjust the text.

2. Extraordinary regularization and ILP for regularization

Another relevant front is the extraordinary regularization of migrants and the Popular Legislative Initiative (ILP) that promoted it:

• The regularization ILP, transformed into a bill, passed the consideration stage in Congress and moved to the committee phase. However, at the end of 2025 it remained “blocked” or without substantive progress, according to information collected by Demócrata ( article from 12/31/2025 ), and in August 2025 it was described as a pending issue for the next session period.
• In parallel, the Government proposed introducing a transitory provision in LO 4/2000 to commit itself to approving, within six months, a Royal Decree establishing the requirements for an extraordinary residence permit (proposal detailed in this draft negotiated with the groups ).
• Finally, the Executive opted for the regulatory route: Royal Decree 1155/2024 approved a new Immigration Regulation and Royal Decree 316/2026, of April 14, modified it to establish an extraordinary regularization (published in the BOE on 04/15/2026: text of RD 316/2026).

Thus, the mass regularization has been channeled mainly outside Parliament, through regulation, while the ILP-originated bill remains formally alive but without a definitive parliamentary closure.

3. Toughening for security reasons and multiple reoffending

In parallel, several groups have used other criminal reforms to partially amend the Immigration Law:

• The Organic Law Bill on multiple reoffending (file 122/000083 in Congress and 624/000007 in the Senate) includes a final provision adding a new article 31 ter to LO 4/2000, aiming to strengthen controls on criminal records in residence and expulsion procedures. In March 2026 it was still in the amendments and committee report phase in the Senate, with no record yet of its final approval in the General Courts.
• Vox and the PP have also promoted specific bills to toughen residency by integration and restrict regularization through this route (for example, the Vox Group initiative in Congress 122/000191 and its counterpart from the Mixed/Vox Group in the Senate 622/000080). The Senate one was taken into consideration on November 19, 2025 and sent to Congress ( Senate Bulletin ), where it appears as 124/000038, in “pending” status.

4. General balance

Overall, the current parliamentary processing of the Immigration Law does not point to a complete recasting of LO 4/2000, but rather to a sum of partial reforms:

• An advanced and already operational block on migrant minors and territorial distribution, in the amendment phase as a bill.
• An extraordinary regularization mainly materialized through regulation (RD 316/2026), with the parliamentary ILP stalled in committee.
• Several attempts at punitive and control toughening (multiple reoffending, residency by integration) underway, without yet completing the legislative cycle.

Until these initiatives are approved or lapse, the basic architecture of the Immigration Law remains LO 4/2000, as amended to date, complemented by the new Immigration Regulation and its latest reforms.

The Government Delegation in the Autonomous City of Ceuta is the highest peripheral body of the General State Administration (AGE) in the Ceuta territory. Its competencies are fundamentally defined in general state legislation (especially the Law 40/2015, on the Legal Regime of the Public Sector) and are complemented by the Statute of Autonomy of Ceuta and regulatory norms on the organization of Government Delegations and orders delegating competencies.

It is not an institution belonging to the City (like the Assembly or the President of Ceuta), but the representative of the Government of Spain in that territory and responsible for directing and coordinating the AGE in Ceuta, as well as exercising various executive competencies and coordination with Ceuta authorities.

1. Representation of the Government and the General State Administration

The Government Delegation in Ceuta assumes the ordinary representation of the Government of the Nation in the city. This implies:

• Appearing, on behalf of the Government, before the City's institutions and other public authorities within Ceuta's territorial scope.
• Being the institutional image of the State at official acts, ceremonies, crises, or exceptional situations affecting the territory.
• Channeling the Government's relations with the Assembly, the President, and the Government Council of the City, without prejudice to direct contacts that may exist at the ministerial level.

2. Direction and coordination of the General State Administration in Ceuta

In application of Law 40/2015 and the regulations on the organization of peripheral services (Royal Decree 1330/1997 and its development), the Government Delegation:

• Directs the AGE in the territory, exercising leadership over the units and peripheral services integrated into the Delegation and coordinating their activity to ensure coherent action.
• Coordinates services not integrated in the Delegation (for example, of state public bodies that maintain their own network), ensuring their actions align with the Government's general guidelines and the territory's needs.
• Supervises compliance in Ceuta with state legislation and policies and programs approved by the Government.

3. Citizen security, public order, and civil protection

One of the most relevant competencies is related to citizen security and public order, which Law 40/2015 assigns to Government Delegates:

• Directing, within the corresponding functional scope, the actions of the State Security Forces and Corps deployed in Ceuta, according to the instructions of the Ministry of the Interior.
• Coordinating security devices in the territory, especially during episodes of social conflict, events of special relevance, or emergency situations.
• Exercising key functions in civil protection, participating in the planning and coordination of state means and resources in emergencies and disasters, in collaboration with City authorities.

4. Coordination and cooperation with the Autonomous City of Ceuta

The Statute of Autonomy of Ceuta (Organic Law 1/1995) foresees collaboration mechanisms between the City and the State. Within this framework:

• The Government Delegation is the ordinary channel of coordination between the AGE and the Autonomous City in policies and services affecting both levels (for example, security, immigration, social services, education, or state-managed health).
• It may participate in mixed State–City bodies or commissions for the development and monitoring of joint plans and programs of works and services, “without prejudice to the competencies” of each Administration, as the Statute provides.
• It collaborates in the articulation of transfers and handovers of functions and services from the State to the City, when agreed through the corresponding norms.

5. Exercise of delegated competencies and administrative management

Besides the functions directly attributed by law, the Government Delegation in Ceuta may exercise various delegated competencies from Ministries or higher bodies, by virtue of royal decrees and ministerial orders:

• Management of subsidies, aids, or state programs executed in Ceuta, when provided by delegation norms.
• Authorization and processing of certain administrative procedures (for example, in matters of registries, electoral processes, immigration, or other areas attributed by regulation).
• Economic-budgetary management of AGE services and units in Ceuta, within the limits and spending decentralizations attributed by regulations.

6. Guarantee of rights and service to citizens

Finally, as a territorial body of the State, the Government Delegation in Ceuta has the general mission of bringing the General State Administration closer to citizens:

• Attending to complaints, suggestions, and demands related to state services in the territory.
• Ensuring respect for the rights and freedoms recognized in the Constitution in the actions of state bodies and services in Ceuta.
• Promoting measures to improve the quality of state public services in coordination with the competent Ministries.

The deployment of security devices at Spanish borders, such as Ceuta, is not a purely technical decision: it requires a clear legal basis, strict respect for fundamental rights, and submission to administrative and judicial controls. Below is a summary of the main requirements and legal frameworks that condition the installation and use of fences, cameras, sensors, or other means at the border.

1. Competence basis and responsible bodies

At the State's external land borders (Ceuta and Melilla), competence corresponds to the General State Administration, through the Ministry of the Interior and, where appropriate, the State Secretariat for Security and the Government Delegations. Organic Law 4/2015, on citizen security protection (text in BOE), and immigration and asylum legislation frame the actions of the Guardia Civil and the National Police Corps in border surveillance.

Additionally, Law 36/2015, on National Security (link), establishes a general framework for risk management to security, within which certain strategic decisions about means and devices at the border can be framed.

2. Need for specific legal authorization

Any security device that affects fundamental rights (physical integrity, privacy, data protection, freedom of movement) requires:

• Sufficient legal authorization: its use must be covered by norms with at least the rank of law, usually organic laws on citizen security and immigration, or regulations that develop them, without exceeding their content.
• Regulation of use and limitations: Organic Law 4/2015 sets principles of action for the Security Forces and Corps and a sanctioning regime; its application at the border cannot justify indefinite or discretionary measures.
• When private security is involved (for example, in internment centers or complementary surveillance systems), Law 5/2014, on Private Security (link), also applies, which limits delegable functions and requires specific authorizations and controls.

3. Rights of migrants and asylum seekers

Decisions about border devices are conditioned by:

• Immigration legislation (Organic Law 4/2000, amended by Organic Law 2/2009, amendment link) and the Regulation of foreign internment centers, approved by Royal Decree 162/2014 (text), which impose limits on the use of force, guarantees of information, and rights of detained persons.
• Law 12/2009, regulating the right of asylum and subsidiary protection (link), which requires that any device or practice at the border respects the right to request asylum and the principle of non-refoulement.
• Specific protocols for unaccompanied foreign minors, such as the Framework Protocol published by Resolution of October 13, 2014 (link), which require identifying and protecting minors and avoiding devices or practices that endanger their integrity.

4. Border rejection in Ceuta and Melilla

The first final provision of Organic Law 4/2015 introduces a special border rejection regime for Ceuta and Melilla, interpreted by the Constitutional Court in STC 172/2020 (ruling) and confirmed in STC 13/2021 (link). According to this jurisprudence:

• Actions at the fence (including physical and surveillance devices) are constitutional only if applied individually, not indiscriminately.
• The real possibility of accessing international protection procedures and respect for the non-refoulement principle must be guaranteed in all cases.
• The use of force in border control must be necessary, suitable, and proportionate, subject to ex post judicial control and complaint mechanisms, including those of the Ombudsman.

5. Technological devices and data protection

Cameras, biometric systems, sensors, or databases applied to border control involve processing personal data. Within the Ministry of the Interior's scope, Order INT/1202/2011 regulates personal data files (link), which implies:

• Need to define purposes, data types, and retention periods.
• Establishment of security measures and access limitations.
• Impact assessments on rights when systems are intrusive (e.g., mass facial recognition), according to data protection and fundamental rights standards.

6. Controls and supervision

Finally, every decision to deploy devices at the border must be:

• Formalized by act or provision (for example, resolutions of the State Secretariat for Security such as that of December 13, 2022, on the partial closure of the land posts of Ceuta and Melilla, link).
• Subject to judicial review by the contentious-administrative jurisdiction.
• Subject to parliamentary control (questions, hearings, investigative commissions) and supervision by the Ombudsman, especially when allegations of rights violations at the border exist.

In summary, deploying security devices at Spanish borders requires clear normative coverage, a design respectful of the rights of migrants and asylum seekers, and effective controls that allow correcting abuses and ensuring accountability.