The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) endorsed this Thursday the Amnesty law approved by the Congress in 2024 in response to the preliminary questions raised about criminal oblivion by both the Court of Auditors and the National Court, regarding the possibility of amnestying embezzlement crimes, on one hand, and terrorism, on the other. The CJEU must indicate whether the rule approved by Congress in 2024 is compatible with the EU legal framework.
Read more The CJEU endorses the amnesty law because it served for “reconciliation”
Although the ruling does not address the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant amnesty to the procés leaders who were convicted or prosecuted for embezzlement – this matter was not the subject of the preliminary questions – such as former president Carles Puigdemont and some of his former ministers, it will affect them, on paper, because the Constitutional Court was waiting for the European justice to endorse the rule to resolve the appeals for protection it has had on its table for a year due to the Supreme Court’s refusal to apply criminal oblivion to them.
Who does this ruling affect?
The ruling sets the judicial horizon for the former president of the Generalitat and leader of Junts, Carles Puigdemont, who remains exiled in Belgium almost nine years after the 1-O referendum, as well as former ministers Lluis Puig and Toni Comín, who are in a similar situation. It also affects the president of Esquerra Republicana, Oriol Junqueras, the secretary general of JxCat, Jordi Turull, as well as other former ministers such as Raül Romeva and Dolors Bassa, all of whom are still disqualified from holding public office.
On another level are the thirty former senior officials of the Govern – including former presidents Artur Mas and Puigdemont – whom the Court of Auditors holds financially responsible for the expenses of the procés and the 1-O, or the members of the Committees for the Defense of the Republic (CDR) prosecuted for terrorism.
Who enforces the ruling?
The rulings issued by the CJEU are always interpretative. They are not enforceable judgments. Therefore, it is up to the national courts, in this case those of Spain, to apply what the Luxembourg judges decide. Although the ruling is favorable to the interests of the independence supporters and endorses the rule approved by the Lower House, initially the procedural situation of the people hoping to benefit from the amnesty does not change.
What will happen now that there is a European endorsement of the amnesty?
In November, the Advocate General of the European Union, Dean Spielmann, in his mandatory opinion, practically endorsed the entire Amnesty law. He only questioned the application deadlines provided in the draft. That report was not binding but usually guides the direction of the ruling, and in this case, the statistics were fulfilled. Now the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court must make a move in the case of Puigdemont and the other former Govern leaders. The Court of Auditors and the National Court, in turn, must also close their respective cases.
In the political sphere, the ruling is a boost to Pedro Sánchez’s government, which was heavily criticized by Vox and PP for agreeing on the Amnesty law with the independence supporters in the first part of the legislature.
What must the Constitutional Court resolve now?
Puigdemont and the other former ministers took to the Constitutional Court the Supreme Court’s refusal to apply the Amnesty law to them, arguing that there was indeed personal gain, one of the exceptions provided in the rule to prevent those charged with corruption from benefiting. The Constitutional Court already validated the Amnesty law in two rulings in 2025 but was waiting for the European courts’ ruling to issue its verdict on the Supreme Court’s refusal to apply criminal oblivion to the procés leaders. The guarantees body is expected to address these appeals from September or October, so the appeals for protection filed a year ago will not be resolved until autumn. There is a plenary session at the guarantees court next week, but amnesty is not on the agenda.
Read more The United States Treasury announces a one-dollar coin featuring Trump’s face
Can the Supreme Court intervene?
The investigating judge of the special procés case, Pablo Llarena, is on duty these weeks and now that he knows the CJEU ruling, he can ask the parties – prosecution and defense – to take a position. Puigdemont’s defense actually considers that the High Court should apply the ruling without waiting for the Constitutional Court, although that scenario is not foreseen. Lawyer Gonzalo Boye refers to what happened with the Parot doctrine and recalls that ETA prisoners and other common inmates – some of them dangerous – were released within weeks, applying the European ruling, without all of them having to file new appeals to the Constitutional Court.
What would have happened if the ruling had been adverse to the independence supporters’ interests?
Puigdemont’s defense has always pointed out that European jurisprudence supports that the former president should not be extradited to Spain, after Llarena denied the extradition proposed by Germany in 2018 for embezzlement. In the other cases that motivated the preliminary questions, the sentences or ongoing judicial processes would have been maintained. In any case, Puigdemont would not find it easy to return to Catalonia, awaiting the Constitutional Court’s ruling, since it must take a stance on the Supreme Court’s position no matter what happens.
How was Junts approaching this ruling?
In JxCat, prudence prevailed in recent months. They argued that whatever the ruling’s direction, the final word lies with the Spanish justice system, and they have already had some setbacks in that regard. If two years ago in the post-convergent organization they took for granted that the law’s entry into force would allow the immediate return of the procés leaders, this time they do not want to jump ahead and fear there might be some “surprise maneuver” in the Supreme Court that further delays the deadlines. The last weekend of July had been planned to commemorate the party’s foundation across the border, as in previous years, but after learning the CJEU schedule, the event was canceled.
Some voices within the party indicated that a favorable ruling and the possible return of the former president to Catalonia would fuel the party to make decisions on how to face the second part of the Catalan legislature, now that Salvador Illa already has the Generalitat’s budgets and a safe passage to 2028, or to address pending debates in a complex context, in which polls predict poor results for JxCat. However, the question remains whether Puigdemont, if he returns, will take his seat in the Parliament – most leaders predict he will not – or if he will run again as a candidate for the presidency of the Generalitat, an aspect about which there is more doubt. In recent months, the former president has stayed away from the spotlight, but it is assumed that if he returns, he will tour all of Catalonia and that his political action will be mainly outside the Ciutadella park.
How does the ruling affect Pedro Sánchez’s government?
The government expected a favorable ruling and that it would be determined that their approach did not contravene the European legal framework. International law was taken into account at all times in drafting the law. In the PSOE, they also awaited the ruling hoping that a possible return of Puigdemont would facilitate rapprochement with Junts at a time when the Executive tries to withstand the opposition’s siege with the drafting of the general state budget, which would be the first – and last – of the legislature. JxCat, for now, opposes it outright.
Read more Trump’s barrage against the natives
