Much more than Puigdemont: everything at stake in the ECJ's decision on amnesty

The European court sets its doctrine on the amnesty law on Thursday in a ruling that could condition the return of the former president, the relationship between PSOE and Junts, the future of the legislature, the Catalan chessboard, and the logic of agreements for the next general elections.

4 minutes

ILUSTRACIONES TEMAS (22)

ILUSTRACIONES TEMAS (22)

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

4 minutes

Most read

‘Qué será, será. Whatever Will be, Will be’, sang the song popularized by Doris Day in 1956. It conveys a simple message: the future is uncertain and cannot be controlled, so there is no point in worrying excessively about what is to come. But one matter has the entire Spanish political and judicial board on edge. The decision of the CJEU on the amnesty law, which will be known this Thursday, will determine the future of Carles Puigdemont. Disregarding the song's advice, the Government, the opposition, pro-independence parties, and the courts have been anticipating scenarios, calibrating consequences, and weaving their respective narratives for days—if not weeks—. At stake is much more than the possible return of the former Catalan president. Nothing more and nothing less than the parliamentary logic that has sustained Pedro Sánchez to date and a potential reconfiguration of forces and alliances for the upcoming general elections.

The Court of Justice of the EU is not issuing a ruling on Puigdemont specifically, but the first major resolution on the amnesty law for the 'procés', based on preliminary questions raised by Spanish courts. His situation will be clarified, as it will determine whether the amnesty can cover embezzlement related to October 1st and certain terrorism offenses.

It will be the first major ruling on the amnesty law and will begin to unravel the knot around which Spanish politics has revolved since 2023

It will be the beginning of the end of an era. It will begin to unravel a knot around which Spanish politics has revolved since 2023, when Sánchez negotiated the amnesty law with the pro-independence movement. The parliamentary majority that sustains the socialist government was built upon this law, and once it is resolved, the logic of pacts could shift.

Potential Scenarios: What the CJEU Will Say

The CJEU's decision is confidential until its reading, and no one knows what it will say. What is known are the legal questions posed and the possible scenarios that jurists and parties are considering: from broad approval of the amnesty to partial corrections or a serious clash with EU Law.

As DEMOCRATA explained, the Luxembourg court will rule on the preliminary questions raised by Spanish bodies regarding the compatibility of the Amnesty Law with Union Law. Among these, doubts stand out as to whether embezzlement linked to 1-O (expenses of the referendum and external action of the ‘procés’) can be amnestied, and as to the European fit of amnesty in cases of terrorism linked to the CDR, in accordance with what was already advanced in the Advocate General's opinion.

The sensitive point for Puigdemont is embezzlement, a crime for which the Supreme Court denied him amnesty and he appealed to the Constitutional Court, which will be guided by what the CJEU says this Thursday.

There are three possible scenarios:

  1. The CJEU substantially upholds the Amnesty Law, which is the thesis closest to the Advocate General's opinion, which already stated that it is not a self-amnesty nor does it violate the financial interests of the EU. In this case, Puigdemont's return to Spain would be smoothed, prior to the withdrawal of the arrest warrant in force for almost nine years.
  2. The endorsement is partial and some aspects, such as deadlines or application criteria, must be retouched. The resolution could be delayed and become very complicated.
  3. A head-on collision between Luxembourg and Spain occurs, which would open a significant rift.

In political terms: how it affects the alliance map

The amnesty law was the central axis of the investiture agreement between Ferraz and Waterloo. If European doctrine strongly supports its application, Pedro Sánchez will gain breathing room and Junts will be able to present the agreement as effective and show political muscle.

His return —or not— has an almost existential dimension for a Junts in free fall in the polls. Barometers place Aliança Catalana above in the regional elections and they are losing momentum in the general elections. Amnesty is their main political asset and the CJEU will tip the scales: a favorable decision would strengthen Puigdemont and his return would mean an injection into their ranks, while a watered-down or contrary resolution would force Junts to decide between toughening negotiations with the PSOE or maintaining some stability (despite the announced breakup).

The ruling will also impact the socialists. Firstly, due to the new direction of relations with Junts and Puigdemont and, secondly, due to the dispute over the narrative with the PP. A CJEU favorable to the application of the amnesty would give a victory to the Executive, which will celebrate the European endorsement and will argue that its law complies with the Constitution and European Law. Facing them, Alberto Núñez Feijóo, who will focus on any limit, warning, nuance, or but that the CJEU ruling may contain. The battle will be interpretive, not legal.

The Popular Party has long been approaching Junts. The spokesperson for Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC) in Congress, Gabriel Rufián, does not miss an opportunity when he can to anticipate a pact between the two to bring Feijóo to Moncloa. And the truth is that the PP leader himself asks to “turn the page”.

Not less important is Friday's detail. The president of Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), Oriol Junqueras, will be the protagonist of an informative breakfast at Nueva Economía Fórum. By a twist of fate, 24 hours after the CJEU ruling. His intervention will provide clues as to how his party intends to capitalize on or react.

The Catalan Republicans have also negotiated the amnesty law with the Government and were the first to move towards an agreement with the PSOE. A favorable ruling will allow them to claim credit and would support their policy of rapprochement and thawing.

This whole cocktail that will modify the orbit of Spanish politics arrives at a crucial moment, with a legislature facing its final stretch, Budgets to be negotiated, and a growing pre-electoral climate.

More key points, information and questions with FREN

AI-GENERATED CONTENT

What was the parliamentary process followed by the Amnesty Law until its final approval in Spain?

The current Amnesty Law was approved in Spain as an Organic Law processed from a Bill Proposal by the PSOE in the Congress, which followed the complete ordinary legislative procedure: qualification and consideration, total and article-by-article amendments, committee report and opinion, approval in Plenary, sending to the Senate, veto by this Chamber and subsequent lifting of the veto by the Congress. That final text became the Organic Law 1/2024, of June 10, published in the BOE on June 11, 2024. Below I detail, step by step, the parliamentary itinerary until its final approval.

Basic data of the law

The approved regulation is the Organic Law 1/2024, of June 10, on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalization in Catalonia, published in the Official State Gazette on June 11, 2024. The full text can be consulted in the BOE through the index of June 11, 2024 at this BOE link.

Its parliamentary origin lies in the Organic Bill Proposal on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalization in Catalonia, presented by the Socialist Parliamentary Group in the Congress with file number 122/000019. The processing file and associated documents are accessible on the Congress website through the legislative initiatives page of this proposal at this Congress link.

Phase in the Congress of Deputies

The Congress Board qualified and admitted the proposal for processing on November 24, 2023, the date on which it was also pending consideration by the Plenary (BOCG-15-B-32-1 Bulletin, available at this initial BOCG).

The consideration took place in December: on December 12 and 18, 2023, the agreements and corresponding publication were recorded (for example, the consideration bulletin BOCG-15-B-32-2, accessible at this consideration bulletin). After this procedure, the amendment period was opened.

On January 10, 2024, the Plenary debated the total amendments with alternative text. The vote recorded 33 votes in favor, 309 against and 0 abstentions, so the total amendments were rejected and the proposal continued its processing. The total amendments presented were published on January 11 in BOCG-15-B-32-4, which can be consulted at this total amendments bulletin.

On January 22, 2024, the article-by-article amendments were published (BOCG-15-B-32-5, accessible at this article amendments bulletin). From there, the Justice Committee appointed a subcommittee that prepared a report on January 29 (BOCG-15-B-32-6, available at this subcommittee report).

On January 30, 2024, the Committee issued its opinion, which was voted on in the Plenary the same day. The opinion vote yielded 177 votes in favor, 172 against and 0 abstentions, and partial amendments from Junts, PNV and the Republican Group were rejected in several votes. The opinion was published in BOCG-15-B-32-7, consultable at this Committee opinion bulletin.

After an extension of deadlines and new work in Committee, on March 14, 2024, the Plenary debated and re-voted the new opinion: the result was 178 yes, 172 no and 0 abstentions. That updated opinion was recorded in BOCG-15-B-32-10, available at this new Congress opinion. With the agreement of March 18, published in BOCG-15-B-32-11 (referral to the Senate), the text was sent to the Senate.

Processing in the Senate and veto

The Senate qualified and admitted the proposal for processing on March 20, 2024 (BOCG_D_15_74_989, available at this Senate admission bulletin). On March 21, a new reference was published (BOCG_D_15_75_994, subsequent Senate bulletin) and the period for amendments and possible vetoes was opened, first until April 3 and then extended until April 9 (information collected in the Senate initiative links of April 3 and 9, at this Senate initiative detail).

After the subcommittee work (report of May 8, 2024, BOCG_D_15_96_1126, available at this Senate subcommittee report), the Committee issued an opinion on May 13 (BOCG_D_15_99_1139, consultable at this Senate Committee opinion). Finally, the Senate approved a veto to the proposal and sent it back to the Congress on May 16, 2024 (BOCG_D_15_101_1146, accessible at this veto referral bulletin).

In parallel, the Senate processed a “Report on the autonomous content” regarding the bill proposal (file (15)544/000011), with subcommittee publications and text on April 5 and 10, 2024 (for example, BOCG_D_15_82_1033, available at this report on autonomous content), although this report did not itself alter the basic legislative procedure.

Lifting of the veto, final approval and publication

Upon receiving the veto, the Congress published it on May 21, 2024 in BOCG-15-B-32-12 (Senate veto publication). On May 30, there was a new debate in Plenary and on June 6, 2024 it was published that the text had been definitively approved by the Congress, which implies the lifting of the Senate veto and the final approval of the law (final text in BOCG-15-B-32-13, available at this definitively approved text).

With this agreement, the General Courts sent the law to the King for sanction. Once sanctioned as Organic Law 1/2024, of June 10, it was published in the BOE on June 11, 2024, entering into force the same day of its publication, as established in its third final provision, accessible again in the BOE index of June 11.

What majorities and parliamentary support made it possible to overcome the Senate veto on the Amnesty Law? What specific contents (crimes, periods and exclusions) does Organic Law 1/2024 on amnesty regulate in its main articles? What constitutional challenges have been filed against the Amnesty Law and what is their status?

What are the exact competences of the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding the national laws of Member States?

Regarding your specific question about the exact competences of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the national laws of Member States, I do not have in the consulted sources specific, systematic, and sufficiently detailed information to rigorously break down the different types of procedures, limits, and effects of its rulings on domestic law. Since I cannot complete that explanation without incurring in unverified information, it is not possible to offer you a detailed and reliable overview of those competences. Moreover, my specialization is focused on the Spanish regulatory and political context, so when it comes to strictly European issues not linked to a specific file or political debate in Spain, my scope is more limited. Below I explain these limits better and in what types of issues I can be helpful.

Scope of the available information

My main field of work is the analysis of:

  • Politics and regulation in Spain: activity of the Government and the General Courts, legislative processes, parliamentary debates, and decisions of the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court when they have political or normative relevance.
  • Spanish political and social current affairs: news about parties, pacts, institutional conflicts, legal reforms and their social or economic impact.
  • Spain–European Union relations: insofar as it is reflected in Spanish internal politics: for example, transposition of directives, control of Spanish measures by European institutions, debates in the Congress about EU decisions, etc.

When it comes, as in your question, to a complete technical-legal exposition about the competences of the CJEU in abstract, applicable to all Member States and to all national laws, the information I have to handle must come from specific sources that do not appear here. In the absence of that basis, I cannot precisely describe:

  • The details of preliminary ruling procedures nor the specific distribution of roles between national courts and the CJEU.
  • Infringement proceedings against Member States nor their procedural requirements.
  • The exact scope of compatibility control between national norms and Union law.
  • The direct and concrete effects of CJEU rulings on laws, regulations or other national provisions.
  • The limits of the CJEU's competence regarding internal constitutional controls or the division of functions between national constitutional courts and the CJEU.

Since these are precisely the pieces you are asking for (compatibility control, preliminary rulings, infringement proceedings, control of national acts applying EU law, effects of rulings and limits), any attempt to reconstruct them without support in sources would go against the instruction not to invent information.

How I can help you, connected to your interest

Although I cannot offer you the complete technical-legal profile of the CJEU, I can be useful in aspects related to your question when they have a clear reflection in Spain, for example:

  • Explain how the Spanish legislator reacts when a CJEU ruling forces a change in a Spanish law (for example, legal reforms driven after European rulings in labor, tax or data protection matters), provided I have concrete information about the case.
  • Describe the political debate in Spain when a CJEU decision affects a controversial Spanish norm, collecting party positions and normative changes being considered.
  • Analyze politically and parliamentary the transposition of directives into the Spanish legal system: which Government promotes it, which groups support or reject it, and what content the reform has.

If you direct your question towards a specific case with impact in Spain (for example, a CJEU ruling on a certain Spanish law, or a Spanish legal reform responding to a European obligation), it is more likely that I can offer you a complete political-legal analysis based on the available information.

Thematic limits and how to formulate future queries

Therefore, in pure European matters (exact structure of CJEU competences, general regime of proceedings, etc.) you should keep in mind that I am not a Union law database, but an assistant specialized in politics and regulation focused on Spain. My greatest added value appears when:

  • The European issue has a direct reflection in Spanish legislative or governmental decisions.
  • It is about understanding the political and social impact in Spain of a European decision or procedure.
  • You want to follow the concrete processing of a Spanish norm linked to obligations derived from the European Union.

If you are interested in continuing to deepen, you can pose your next question linking the CJEU or EU law with a case, a law or a specific political debate in Spain; in that field I will be able to give you a much more substantive answer.

Can you explain a specific case in which a CJEU ruling forced Spain to change a national law? What mechanisms exist in Spain to quickly adapt a law when the CJEU declares it violates Union law? How is the transposition of a controversial European directive debated in the Congress of Deputies?

What have been the results of the last general elections in Spain and how has the Amnesty Law affected the composition of the Congress?

The last general elections in Spain were held on July 23, 2023 and resulted in a highly fragmented Congress: the PP was the leading force with 137 seats and 33.1% of the vote, followed by the PSOE with 121 seats and 31.7%. Vox obtained 33 deputies (12.4%) and Sumar 31 (12.3%), while several nationalist and regionalist parties completed Pedro Sánchez's investiture majority. The Amnesty Law approved in 2024 and later endorsed by the Constitutional Court has not changed the distribution of seats nor the group structure in the Congress, although it has been key in the political negotiation between the Government and pro-independence partners.

Results of July 23: seat and vote distribution

According to the official results published in the BOE and collected by the Ministry of the Interior and main media, the seat distribution in the Congress (350 in total) after July 23 was as follows:

  • PP: 137 seats, 8,091,840 votes, 33.1% of valid votes (RTVE special).
  • PSOE: 121 seats, 7,760,970 votes, 31.7%.
  • Vox: 33 seats, 3,033,744 votes, 12.4%.
  • Sumar: 31 seats, 3,014,006 votes, 12.3%.
  • ERC: 7 seats, 462,883 votes (1.9%).
  • Junts: 7 seats, 392,634 votes (1.6%).
  • EH Bildu: 6 seats, 333,362 votes (1.4%).
  • PNV: 5 seats, 275,782 votes (1.1%).
  • BNG: 1 seat, 152,327 votes (0.6%).
  • Coalición Canaria: 1 seat, 114,718 votes (0.5%).
  • UPN: 1 seat, 51,764 votes (0.2%).

Turnout was around 70.4% of the census. The PP "won" the elections but without a majority to govern, and the PSOE managed to articulate an investiture relying on Sumar and forces such as ERC, Junts, EH Bildu, PNV, BNG, CC and UPN. These data can be consulted in detail in resources such as RTVE's special on July 23, the proclamation agreement in the BOE of August 30, 2023 (official publication) and subsequent analyses by mainstream media (El País, El Mundo, Wikipedia 2023).

What exactly does the Amnesty Law do

The Organic Law on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalization in Catalonia was definitively approved by the Congress on May 30, 2024, by lifting the Senate veto with 177 votes in favor and 172 against, according to the official note from the Congress of Deputies (Congress note) and the Demócrata chronicle (Demócrata). The law was later published in the BOE as Organic Law 1/2024 (current legal text).

Its content, as summarized by the Congress and Demócrata, focuses on:

  • Amnestying criminal, administrative and accounting offenses linked to the "procés" and the consultations of November 9, 2014 and October 1, 2017 within a delimited period.
  • Excluding certain serious cases of terrorism, treason or crimes against peace and national defense.
  • Modifying the Criminal Code and the Court of Auditors Law to recognize amnesty as a cause for extinction of liability.

That is, its effects are fundamentally criminal and administrative: it extinguishes responsibilities and penalties, lifts arrest warrants and allows, where appropriate, the refund of some fines. It does not introduce any specific provision on loss or acquisition of seats in the Congress nor on the composition of parliamentary groups.

Effects on the composition of the Congress

In practice, since its entry into force and subsequent endorsement by the Constitutional Court (analysis in Demócrata), no numerical change in seats attributable to the amnesty has occurred:

  • Deputies from ERC, Junts, EH Bildu or other pro-independence parties were already fully exercising their functions in the Congress; the law does not "restore" a lost seat to them.
  • Carles Puigdemont, one of the main political beneficiaries, is not a deputy in the Congress, so a possible return does not alter the current hemicycle.
  • No registrations or deregistrations of deputies, nor group changes, linked to the direct application of the amnesty have been recorded; when there have been movements (for example, the Ábalos case) they responded to different judicial causes and were managed with the ordinary rules of suspension of deputies, as Demócrata explains (article on Ábalos).

Where it has had impact is in the political geometry of the Congress: the law was an essential condition of the investiture agreement between PSOE and Junts, and continues to condition key votes, such as budgets or regulation reforms, as various analyses by Demócrata on the investiture bloc and the role of Junts and ERC show. But that impact is political, not arithmetic: the number of seats of each group remains that which the July 23 election yielded.

Other resources and context

To deepen in the electoral data of July 23, besides the BOE already cited, the EPDATA data special (EPDATA), summaries in media such as Infobae (Infobae 23J) and general context entries on Spanish elections (general elections history, English summary) can be consulted. Regarding the amnesty, besides the legal text in the BOE, the CEPC legal analysis (CEPC report), the explanatory article by AS (AS) and context pieces such as those by the BBC (BBC Mundo) are useful.

How are the seats in the Congress distributed by constituencies after July 23? Which specific parties currently support Pedro Sánchez's investiture majority and how many deputies does each have? What challenges against the Amnesty Law are still pending and how could they affect its practical application?

Play

Test your knowledge with FREN!

How much do you know about this topic? Answer the following 3 questions.

What will the next ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) determine?

Question 1 of 3

What is the key crime for Carles Puigdemont's judicial situation according to the news?

Question 2 of 3

What political effect could a favorable CJEU ruling for the Amnesty Law have?

Question 3 of 3

Hola, soy Fren. ¿Cómo te ayudo?