Cancel the election

The Spanish Constitutional Court has ruled against the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, rejecting a constitutional appeal filed by the Ombudsman, Angel Gabilondo. This decision upholds the Supreme Court’s interim suspension of the application of the Grandchildren Law, which grants citizenship to descendants of Spaniards who left during the Civil War and Franco era. The ruling marks a notable departure from recent trends, as the court’s progressive majority, led by President Candido Conde-Pumpido, has frequently issued decisions favorable to the Socialist Party-led administration. By siding with the high court this time, the Constitutional Court effectively ended a period where it often overruled the Supreme Court in politically sensitive cases. The central conflict involves the implementation of the Grandchildren Law. The Supreme Court had previously suspended the law’s application regarding the registration of new citizens for voting purposes, specifically targeting the census of residents abroad known as CERA. The Ombudsman challenged this suspension, arguing it violated fundamental rights. However, the full bench of the Constitutional Court admitted the appeal but ultimately rejected its merits, leaving the Supreme Court’s order intact. This outcome contrasts sharply with previous rulings where the same judicial body favored the executive branch, such as in matters related to the amnesty law and the ERE labor fraud case. In those instances, the court aligned with the government’s position, creating a pattern that political observers described as consistent support for the PSOE. Critics from the right-wing perspective argue that the judiciary is acting with excessive ambition and bias. A retired jurist formerly prominent at the Supreme Court warned that the current system risks becoming a "government of judges," potentially leading to criminal charges against Sanchez for corruption or treason. This individual suggested that efforts might be made to invalidate upcoming elections if the results do not align with conservative preferences. The Supreme Court has recently demanded the names of approximately 163,000 individuals who obtained nationality through the Grandchildren Law. It threatened the government with potential criminal liability if these records were not provided within three business days. Opponents claim this pressure is designed to expose flaws in the electoral process, particularly concerning the CERA vote, which allows Spanish nationals living abroad to cast ballots. They allege that the high court is using procedural warnings to mask the inadequacy of its initial suspension order. Supporters of the current government and left-wing commentators counter that the right-wing coalition is attempting to undermine democratic legitimacy. One analysis published in a digital outlet argued that the People's Party (PP) and Vox have formed a de facto coalition with the primary objective of controlling the judiciary. The argument posits that their goal is to secure a reinforced parliamentary majority of three-fifths in the Senate. Such a supermajority would allow them to appoint four pending Constitutional Court magistrates without needing agreement from the PSOE. These appointments have been delayed for ten months, despite constitutional deadlines. The PP leader, Alberto Nunez Feijoo, reportedly indicated in an interview that he seeks this specific majority, suggesting the delay is strategic until after the next general election. Historical context reveals that blocking the renewal of the Council of State and the Constitutional Court has become a recurring tactic used by successive right-wing leaders, including Jose Maria Aznar, Mariano Rajoy, Pablo Casado, and now Feijoo. Critics describe this practice as anti-democratic because it extends the tenure of officials beyond their legitimate mandate. Currently, the Council of State, which nominates Supreme Court justices, has maintained a conservative majority for more than 22 years out of the last three decades, even though the left governed Spain for 16 of those years. This imbalance means many current Supreme Court judges were appointed by a council whose democratic mandate had expired. Consequently, the right holds overwhelming majorities in all chambers of the Supreme Court, a situation attributed to the discretionary appointment processes controlled by the council. Legal experts note that while the Central Electoral Board validates elections based on the principle of preserving the result, minor irregularities typically do not lead to annulment unless they alter the final outcome. Nevertheless, the PP has announced plans to intensify surveillance in polling stations and may seek partial nullification in districts where results are unfavorable, citing irregular ballots. Consular officials acknowledge difficulties in complying with the Supreme Court’s demand for detailed voter data, noting that the CERA vote, while historically leaning progressive, is not statistically decisive in national elections. The dispute highlights deep divisions over the independence of the judiciary and the balance of power between legislative and judicial branches in Spain. The immediate consequence of the Constitutional Court’s decision is that the Supreme Court’s suspension of the Grandchildren Law’s voting provisions remains in effect. This prevents newly recognized citizens from being fully integrated into the electoral census for upcoming polls. The ruling reinforces the authority of the Supreme Court in administrative matters involving citizenship and voting rights. Political tensions remain high as both sides prepare for the next general election. The opposition continues to press for transparency in the handling of citizen data, while the government defends the legality of the Grandchildren Law and criticizes judicial interference in political affairs. The standoff underscores ongoing debates about the role of courts in resolving disputes between state institutions and the limits of judicial review in sensitive political contexts.