The Supreme Court's decision to reject the Government's appeal and maintain the precautionary suspension linked to the so-called grandchildren's law continues to provoke opposing reactions among the main political parties, just over a month before the general elections on November 29. The controversy affects Spaniards residing abroad who acquired nationality under the democratic memory law and whose inclusion in the electoral roll is questioned for not proving that they are descendants of exiles.
The Government and the parties to its left believe that the measure restricts the voting rights of Spanish citizens, while PP and Vox defend the Supreme Court's intervention and argue that it must be ensured that the nationalizations comply with legal requirements. The resolution has also opened a debate on how to apply the suspension with the electoral calendar already underway.
The controversy revolves around the application of the eighth additional provision of the democratic memory law and the administrative instruction that developed its procedure.
The Government disagrees with the Supreme Court but guarantees that it will comply with the resolution
The Government spokesperson, Elma Saiz, has criticized the Supreme Court's decision and defended that in a democracy "the right to vote is guaranteed, not restricted."
During the press conference following the Council of Ministers, Saiz described the situation as "of extraordinary gravity" because it affects, in the Executive's opinion, a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution.
Despite her disagreement with the judicial criterion, the minister has assured that "the Government always complies with judicial resolutions" and explained that Moncloa continues to analyze the scope of the ruling.
The Executive has also not specified whether it will go to the Constitutional Court. Government sources believe that it could be the affected citizens themselves who have standing to appeal and acknowledge difficulties in applying the resolution before November 29.
In Moncloa, they also warn that some of the affected voters participated in previous electoral processes and consider it especially complex to modify their electoral situation now. The Government also accuses PP and Vox of fueling suspicions about the guarantees of the electoral system.
Feijóo defends the cleanliness of the electoral roll and announces monitors at all polling stations
For its part, the president of the Popular Party, Alberto Núñez Feijóo, has supported the position of the Supreme Court and has placed the controversy in the need to guarantee the legality of the electoral roll.
"There is no democratic cleanliness if there is no cleanliness of the roll", he stated in an interview on esRadio, in which he announced that the PP will deploy monitors and representatives at "all the polling places" on the next November 29.
Feijóo has rejected that his party opposes the recognition of the nationality of the descendants of exiles. As he explained, his disagreement centers on the administrative instruction that, in his opinion, expanded the assumptions provided for in the law.
The popular leader has accused the Executive of extending "indiscriminately" access to nationality and has defended the need to protect the legal value of the Spanish passport.
For the PP, the debate does not reside in preventing the vote of those who meet the legal requirements, but in verifying that the registration of the new Spanish citizens has been carried out in accordance with the regulations.
Vox celebrates the decision and announces that it will review nationalizations if it comes to power
The head of the Vox delegation in the European Parliament, Jorge Buxadé, has celebrated that the Supreme Court maintains the suspension and has announced that his party will review the nationalizations granted under the 'grandchildren's law' if it comes to power and has sufficient support.
In a television interview, Buxadé has maintained that there are doubts about the legality of the nationalizations processed through the administrative instruction of 2022, which is attributed to Sofía Puente.
The Vox leader has defended that only those who can document their status as descendants of Spanish exiles should be able to vote and has accused the Administration of having improperly expanded the scope of the law.
He has also announced that his party would demand criminal responsibilities from officials who certified false data or participated in possible irregularities. These are accusations made by Buxadé, not irregularities accredited in general.
Podemos accuses the Supreme Court of violating fundamental rights
The Secretary General of Podemos, Ione Belarra, has reacted with particular harshness to the resolution and has stated that "Justice is the greatest threat to democracy in this country".
In an appearance before the media in Congress, Belarra has accused the Supreme Court of having "stolen the right to vote" from about 160,000 citizens and has considered that the decision constitutes an "absolutely flagrant violation of fundamental rights."
The leader of Podemos has maintained that there is no legal provision that allows the withdrawal of the right to vote from a Spanish citizen in this way.
Belarra has also directed her criticisms at the Government of Pedro Sánchez, whom she reproaches for not having promoted a sufficient reform of the judicial system. In particular, she has accused the Executive of having "handed over control of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) to the political right."
Sumar denounces a "politicized" resolution and points to PP and Vox
From Sumar, the deputy of the Comunes Gerardo Pisarello has described the Supreme Court's ruling as "absurd from a legal point of view" and has accused PP and Vox of using their influence over the Judiciary to limit the voting rights of Spanish citizens.
Pisarello has denounced that the decision is "politicized" and "unprecedented" and has questioned the actions of the reporting magistrate, Antonio Narváez, to whom he has attributed favorable statements regarding a potential presidency of the Government of Feijóo.
In the opinion of the parliamentarian, the ruling "flagrantly violates the Constitution and the democratic principle" and is part of a strategy by the right to sow doubts about electoral integrity.
The deputy has compared that strategy to the actions of Donald Trump in the United States and has called for a citizen response to what he considers an attempt to limit democratic rights through the courts.
About 163,000 affected voters and difficulties in applying the suspension
The Supreme Court's ruling potentially affects 163,020 people, according to figures provided by the State Attorney's Office. The Administrative Litigation Chamber has maintained the precautionary measure by five votes to one, with a dissenting opinion from one magistrate.
The high court considers that the protection of transparency and the integrity of the electoral roll justifies maintaining the suspension while the substance of the litigation is resolved. The measure allows those who duly prove the requirements demanded by law to vote.
The practical application remains one of the main problems. According to the information known this Tuesday, the Electronic Civil Registry allows identifying more than 70,000 naturalized, but there are around 90,000 files whose location requires additional checks.
The confrontation between the parties occurs, therefore, while it remains unresolved how to execute the measure before the 29N. The Supreme Court's decision is precautionary and does not imply a definitive ruling on the legality of the naturalizations, although its effects may prevent thousands of citizens from exercising their vote in the upcoming general elections.