With the ruling issued this Thursday by the European justice system, the amnesty law promoted by the Government and the pro-independence parties has passed the two filters that can threaten a law approved by Parliament: that of the Constitutional Court and that of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Since it came into force two years ago, the pardon measure has already accumulated 21 favorable rulings, 19 from the Constitutional Court, which has declared that the norm fits within the Fundamental Law; and the two now issued by the European judges, who conclude that the pardon measure fits within community law. These rulings discard that the law with which the Executive and its partners intended to bury the judicial cases linked to the procés incurs in the range of violations denounced by the PP and Vox and alleged by some courts to stop its application, but Europe leaves the granting of the pardon measure in each specific case in the hands of the Spanish judges, although the path marked by the CJEU and the Constitutional Court gives them little room to oppose it.
Read more United States bombs northern Iran and tightens the siege on Hormuz
The European rulings have been received with “great satisfaction” among the progressive, and majority, sector of the guarantees court. These sources recall the “strong criticisms” that their favorable rulings on the amnesty have received, some from within the court itself through the dissenting opinions – “aggressive and forceful” – signed by minority magistrates, who argued that the amnesty violates community law and demanded that the Constitutional Court consult the CJEU before ruling on the pardon measure. Finally, it was the CJEU that included in one of its rulings the arguments used by the guarantees court to support the law (“that the amnesty […] aims to reduce the institutional and political tensions generated by the Catalonia independence process and facilitate a scenario of reconciliation”)
The guarantees court declared the constitutionality of the amnesty for the first time in June 2025 and, since then, has issued 19 favorable rulings, derived from appeals filed by the PP and the regional barons, and the questions of unconstitutionality raised by the Supreme Court and the High Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC). Number 20, in response to the Extremadura appeal, is expected next Tuesday, and with it, all appeals questioning the fit of the pardon measure within the Constitution will have been resolved. But the work of the guarantees court on the amnesty does not end here.
The body must respond to the seven appeals for protection filed by the pro-independence leaders to whom the Supreme Court has refused to grant the pardon measure, considering that the embezzlement crime attributed to them is not covered by the law promoted by the Government, ERC, and Junts. The Constitutional Court plans to resolve the first of these appeals in October and, if it rules in favor of the convicted and prosecuted, that resolution should lead to the full application of the amnesty to all the procés leaders.
These are the next steps expected following the European justice rulings:
What consequences will the CJEU ruling have? The response of the European judges dispels the legal doubts that some of the courts that had to apply the amnesty had expressed. After this Thursday’s rulings, the Court of Auditors must resume the application of the law to the 35 former senior officials it prosecuted for their accounting responsibility of the pro-independence leaders, and the National Court will have to decide on the application of the pardon measure to the CDR accused of terrorism. In addition, the Supreme Court now has to resolve several appeals against the convictions for public disorder issued by the Girona Court following the incidents that occurred in the protests after the procés ruling. The Constitutional Court dismissed last October a question of unconstitutionality raised by the Supreme Court about the amnesty law in the context of these appeals, but the Criminal Chamber has refused to apply the guarantees court’s decision pending the CJEU ruling. Sources from the high court indicate that these cases will be addressed starting in September.
Read more Marco Rubio calls 66 countries to a meeting to combat “left-wing extremists” worldwide
Can judges oppose applying the amnesty after the CJEU rulings? European justice leaves the decision to grant the pardon measure in each pending case in the hands of the Spanish courts, but this Thursday’s rulings leave very little room not to do so, specifically in the case of the Court of Auditors and the National Court, but, by extension, in the rest of the courts that have open cases linked to the procés. Judges have two options: to grant amnesty to all prosecuted or convicted; or to deny the application of the pardon measure by invoking one of the exceptions contemplated by the law for embezzlement and terrorism crimes, as the Supreme Court already did. The Court of Auditors has little room to try this path because, according to the literal wording of the law, the exceptions to the amnesty for the diversion of public funds only apply to “acts classified as crimes,” which limits the exception to criminal liability and does not affect accounting responsibility, which is what that court rules on.
Does the Luxembourg court’s decision affect Puigdemont? It does so directly for the Court of Auditors case, in which he is one of the 35 accused. The ruling also impacts the embezzlement prosecution for which the Supreme Court keeps the arrest warrant active against him because European justice has declared that the diversion of public funds to finance the October 1, 2017 referendum and to support the external action of the procés did not affect the EU’s economic interests, which was one of the Spanish high court’s arguments for not granting amnesty to the former president of the Generalitat and the rest of the members of his government prosecuted or convicted for this crime.
Will the Junts leader be able to return to Spain after the European ruling? It is not foreseeable in the short term if he does not want to risk being arrested. The Supreme Court held that the procés embezzlement is not amnestiable because the law prevents forgiving it if it affected EU finances or if the accused benefited from patrimonial enrichment. And according to the Criminal Chamber, both things happened. Therefore, although the CJEU has declared that the first exception does not apply, the second still exists, which depends exclusively on the interpretation that the Spanish high court makes of the amnesty law. Supreme Court sources indicate that it is not expected that the magistrate instructor of the procés, Pablo Llarena, will lift the arrest warrant ex officio; if any of the lawyers requested it, he would study it, but these sources lean towards considering that he will not change his stance. For its part, the Criminal Chamber, which refused to grant amnesty to Oriol Junqueras and the rest of the former ministers already tried and convicted, also does not foresee changing its criteria after the CJEU ruling.
Is any judicial ruling expected that could change the Supreme Court’s stance? Yes. Puigdemont, Oriol Junqueras, and the rest of those convicted and prosecuted for embezzlement appealed to the Constitutional Court against the high court’s refusal to apply the amnesty to them and, in the case of the former president, the decision to maintain the arrest warrant against him. The Constitutional Court decided to wait for the CJEU ruling to resolve those challenges, so this Thursday’s ruling brings that decision closer. Sources from the guarantees court indicate that the plan is to bring the first ruling, related to the appeal filed by former minister Jordi Turull, to one of the two plenary sessions scheduled for September. However, the ruling may be delayed because the rapporteur for this case has been assigned to conservative magistrate José María Macías, one of the most critical of the pardon measure, so unless the CJEU ruling makes him change his mind, it is expected that his proposal will be to reject the pro-independence leader’s appeal. If the majority considers that protection should be granted, a new rapporteur will have to be appointed to draft a ruling with that outcome. Sources from the court indicate that, in that case, the response to Turull’s appeal could arrive in October. The doctrine established will apply both to those convicted of embezzlement (Turull, Junqueras, Raül Romeva, and Dolors Bassa) and to those prosecuted in absentia (Puigdemont, Toni Comín, and Lluís Puig), so these sources consider that the Supreme Court should apply it ex officio to all of them. Otherwise, the Constitutional Court will respond one by one to the seven appeals for protection.
Could the Supreme Court deny the application of the amnesty if the Constitutional Court rules in favor of the pro-independence leaders? There are differing opinions in the Criminal Chamber on this issue. Some sources lean towards considering that if the Constitutional Court supports those convicted of embezzlement, it is time to “turn the page”: the amnesty must be applied to them and, in Puigdemont’s case, the arrest warrant against him must be immediately nullified. But another sector believes that the Supreme Court, which did not ask European justice before deciding not to apply the pardon measure, will have to study the options and could appeal to the CJEU. However, until now, that option was considered due to doubts about compatibility between Spanish and European law, and that path is practically closed with this Thursday’s rulings, unless the Criminal Chamber finds a loophole on which community justice has not yet ruled.
