Spanish courts delay amnesty implementation as Constitutional Court draft sparks Supreme Court friction

Supreme Court friction over draft ruling

A draft ruling by Constitutional Court President Cándido Conde-Pumpido regarding the amnesty law for Catalan separatist politicians has provoked severe indignation among Supreme Court magistrates. The dispute centres not merely on legal disagreements regarding embezzlement offences, but on language within the draft that magistrates consider insulting toward the high court's prior conduct. Several judges at the Supreme Court view the draft's reprimands as veiled accusations of judicial malfeasance against the Second Criminal Chamber, warning that such statements could encourage future legal challenges by pro-independence figures. Some magistrates described Conde-Pumpido as acting with "soberbia", while others attributed the draft's tone to personal ego and past resentments. Supreme Court members have rejected a low-profile acceptance of the ruling, indicating that a formal written response is under preparation once the text is finalized.

Constitutional Court plenary deliberations

The draft decision prepared by Conde-Pumpido, which aims to facilitate the return to Spain of former Catalan regional president Carles Puigdemont, will be formally submitted for debate at an upcoming plenary session. The review begins on Tuesday, 6 October, where the text will be examined alongside a separate proposal authored by conservative magistrate José María Macías. The current version remains provisional and will be subject to modifications if a majority of magistrates vote to alter its contents. The final decision must be issued collegially, bearing the signatures of all participating members or at least the majority voting bloc. Plenary discussions will determine whether progressive magistrates fully endorse Conde-Pumpido's approach or amend the wording to de-escalate institutional friction with the Supreme Court.

Audiencia Nacional terrorism proceedings

Separately, specialized courts have yet to apply the amnesty measure despite a ruling issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 16 July. The European court dismissed objections to the Spanish statute regarding counter-terrorism standards and public accounting liability. In the Audiencia Nacional, the case involves members of the Committees for the Defence of the Republic who were investigated for possessing substances capable of conversion into explosives. Public prosecutors had previously sought prison sentences of up to 27 years for eight defendants on charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation, manufacturing explosive substances, and attempted havoc. Although prosecutors supported granting amnesty, opposition from the Catalan Association of Victims of Terrorist Organisations led the court to submit preliminary questions to Luxembourg. The Third Section of the Criminal Chamber delayed action until receiving formal notification of the European ruling in late September, subsequently granting a 10-day deadline for all parties to present submissions on its scope.

Stalled proceedings in the Court of Audit

Implementation has also encountered procedural delays within the Court of Audit, where public spending on the 2017 independence referendum and regional foreign diplomacy is under review. Councillor Elena Hernáiz, tasked with adjudicating financial liability for the vote, initiated an initial round of submissions in July to assess whether diverted funds originated from European Union budgets. That criterion represents the only legal basis under which European financial interests could be considered harmed. Despite the European court ruling leaving minimal room to withhold the measure of grace, the tribunal has continued procedural steps without implementing the amnesty.