There is only one week left until the eighth anniversary of the first successful motion of no confidence in the history of our democracy, which I had the honor of leading in 2018. The censure against the President of the Government of Spain is regulated in Article 113 of the Constitution. To date, a total of six have been held in the Congress against Presidents Adolfo Suárez (1980), Felipe González (1987), Mariano Rajoy (2017 and 2018), and Pedro Sánchez (2020 and 2023). In The Manual , (Contraluz 2026) looking to the future and the 2027 general elections, I explain what made the success of that motion possible. Was it because of the Gürtel case ruling, that is, the troubles of corruption, or rather because a government was proposed in line with the parliamentary majority actually existing in the chamber, which demanded, after so much territorial division, a clear project of coexistence behind it?
Read more Arnaldo Otegi: “The legislature must be concluded with a plurinational program”
The parties leaning towards the first option (for example, the PP) tell us that the censure was a simple technical exercise of democratic cleansing and, consequently, today in light of what happened with Zapatero, the same parliamentary groups that supported the president then should again support the current leader of the opposition, Alberto Núñez Feijóo. The leader of the Popular Party would be obliged to present this political act, given the scandal, even though there is absolutely no ruling involved. And this is not a minor detail, as the samurai meditating in Sanxenxo would say, since part of the current affairs industry still misses the point, because a court order or an investigation is not the same as a ruling not only in Spain but also in France, Germany, and across Europe. That motion not only lacks votes but also lacks substance.
Feijóo has the power to challenge although for now he resists pressing the nuclear button because he knows that, since September 2023, he has not moved from his position. He is tied to Vox for not being a free politician.
We insist with the question and the answers, because the principle of gravity is decisive in politics. It is all there, despite many international ramifications that can be established regarding the former president, which do exist. Let us return to the scene of the events, to the Congress of Deputies eight years ago. Let us look at each other’s faces again. What does it really mean to present a motion of no confidence? Feijóo can do it because he has a parliamentary group with more than 35 deputies, although for now he resists pressing the nuclear button because he knows very well that since his investiture speech in September 2023, he has not moved from his position. He is in the same place (tied to Vox), for not being a free politician. He would only count on the favorable votes of Santiago Abascal and with them, the censure is not reached, although governments are formed in Aragón, Extremadura, and soon in Castilla León or Andalusia.
They pretend and disguise saying that this no longer holds, with airs of agony. There is a reason. It happened virtually 10 years ago, in June 2016, when the then repeat election produced the Congress that precisely first invested Rajoy, after the troubled departure of the then secretary general of the PSOE (first Sánchez), and two years later censured the same Rajoy, with the unexpected return of the current secretary general of the PSOE (second Sánchez). Being the same person, they were two completely different politicians. Also their teams. The Sánchez who presented the motion of no confidence was a free politician trying to weave the existing parliamentary majority and not the Sánchez who tried, for example, that agreement with Albert Rivera.
Read more Explanations no matter the cost
If a motion were presented, therefore, we remind you that it would be the same deputies who invested Sánchez in November 2023 who would have to explain to their voters the reasons for their censure. That was something the parliamentary groups that supported Sánchez eight years ago could do, precisely because the only one who changed position was the PSOE, which went from the mistake of that painful abstention in October 2016 to the censure of June 2018. The rest of the majority voted against the investiture of the PP and in favor of the motion. The coexistence proposal of the PP-Vox consortium is conspicuously absent. Yesterday’s Aitor Esteban should take this into account. Ontologically impossible constructs such as the repeal of sanchismo , if not the MAGA movement, still prevail in their message. Spaniards value loyalty, even if you make mistakes, and they know that coexistence is not organized by the judiciary but by the executive and legislative powers they vote for.
Next week
More coexistence
In this electoral silence, and awaiting how Madrid DF resolves its motion of no confidence, all the right wings have their coexistence model pending for a social majority. For its part, the current transversal majority is pending to specify the plurinational expectation that was behind the motion eight years ago, but which has been a majority for ten years. Transversal and plurinational majority, which is something different from just the left. If these empty sets are not filled, corrosion and lack of response will take over everything.
Hawk eye
Lessons
The small details and their lessons. First detail: if Pedro Sánchez had not won the 2017 primaries, Mariano Rajoy would have completed the legislature. Second detail: the PSOE would not exist as we know it, the mahogany socialism would have taken over everything as happened with the caretaker committee. And third and last detail: the ruling that connected social majority, Congress, and Government was, in all honesty, that of the wolf pack and not the Gürtel case. That Spain could not hold itself up and this was expressed in the streets.
Read more Is Spain corrupt?
