The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) that supports the right of the Constitutional Court to veto the processing of motions in favor of the right to self-determination or against the monarchy is undoubtedly a bucket of cold water and a reality check for the independence movement. It is true that the ECHR decision balances the rights of the deputies and the TC, but it also seems that the idea that European justice would end up giving the independence movement the right in all its cases against Spain has turned out not to be true. It is not so easy, therefore, for European judges to overrule a decision by the highest interpreter of the Constitution of a Member State.
The ECHR comes to say that the Catalan deputies have the right to discuss legal reforms that question the constitutional framework but that the TC also has the right to veto them "in extreme circumstances", thus making the arguments of the State Attorney's Office its own. It must be said that no one questions the right of the TC to annul motions or resolutions if it considers that they do not comply with the law, but always a posteriori, and not preventively as was done in these cases. The Strasbourg interpretation is therefore debatable, since extensive use of this doctrine would completely restrict debates in any Parliament. And even more so when in Spain it is perfectly legal to disagree with the Constitution as it is not a militant democracy.
The truth is that this decision is a bad omen for all the cases that are still pending in Strasbourg, the most important of which will be the one that judges the sentence of the Supreme Court against the leaders of the Process. This will be the test of European justice, since it will have to decide whether in the 21st century public representatives can be imprisoned on charges of the crime of "sedition" when there was no violence required by this criminal figure. To give a similar example, some of the attackers in the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, where there were deaths and numerous material damages, did receive sentences for sedition.
It should be remembered that, fortunately, sedition is no longer present in the Spanish Penal Code, and that not even the PP advocates bringing it back under that name but under the name of "disloyalty against the Constitution." But we must also be aware that right now the Catalan question is not on the European agenda and the Strasbourg judges are more concerned with cases in which the extreme right is attacking the rule of law. In this new context, it will not be easy to obtain convictions against Spain. However, those affected must persist and defend their rights until the end of the judicial process, even if Europe turns a deaf ear. And, finally, it is also worth remembering that, ultimately, the amnesty already represents a severe correction to those sentences.
