The Constitutional changes the Process for the PP-PSOE war

MadridThe Constitutional Court is more than an arbiter of conflicts over the Magna Carta. In recent years, it has become a political battlefield where governments and parties have tried to settle their disputes. No one is unaware of the leading role it played during the 'Procés', with Mariano Rajoy constantly using it to curb the independence movement's roadmap. However, in recent years its prominence has been shifting: jurisdictional conflicts with Catalonia no longer top its list of priorities. The conflict with the independence movement has given way to a bipartisan dispute.

The origin of one of the main battlegrounds dates back to the processing of the amnesty law in the Senate, when the legal advisors invited the PP to inaugurate a new combative strategy: the conflict between constitutional bodies, which is initiated when one institution considers that another has usurped its powers. And the Popular Party has become fond of it. In just over two years of legislature, the PP has initiated twelve to try to put Congress or the Spanish government on the ropes, on which the TC has not yet ruled. After against the amnesty they backed down, the first consummated conflict was against Congress following the law that favored ETA prisoners.

The 12 conflicts between constitutional bodies

Besides this first one, the PP has promoted four more –eight in total– against the lower house and the Spanish government for the processing of laws. And it has lit the fuse three more times: against Congress for the systematic use of extensions to the amendment process to freeze the processing of laws; against Moncloa for not having presented the general state budgets, and even against Pedro Sánchez for not having appeared in the Senate regarding the Adamuz accident. The PSOE has also entered the fray and has taken two Senate regulation reforms instigated by the PP to the Constitutional Court. One of them, the one the Popular Party used to delay the processing of the amnesty, was declared unconstitutional once it had already fulfilled its mission.

Catalonia ceases to be in the spotlight

According to the reports on conflictivity prepared by the Ministry of Territorial Policy, Mariano Rajoy took 49 laws approved by the regional parliaments to the Constitutional Court. Of these, 26 were from Catalonia. 53%. That is, one out of every two times the PP went to the TC from Moncloa, it was against the Parliament. On the other hand, Pedro Sánchez only maneuvered to take one Catalan law to the Constitutional Court, out of a total of 27 regional laws he has appealed: the Catalan housing law that obliged large landlords to offer social rent before filing an eviction lawsuit. Moncloa and the Government reached a partial agreement to save it, but it was partially annulled by an appeal by the PP and another by Vox.

What other conflicts have there been between the Catalan government and Sánchez's executive? The Generalitat challenged two decrees from the Spanish government – the international adoption regulation and one related to vocational training– and the TC partially annulled them. And Moncloa managed to cut back part of the Strategic Plan for Foreign Action and Relations with the European Union 2019-2022 that Quim Torra had approved. On the other hand, one of the focuses on which the PSOE executive has placed the most emphasis has been the so-called 'concordia' laws that the PP agreed with Vox in Aragon, Cantabria, and the Valencian Community.

Communities against Moncloa

Likewise, in recent years, the belligerence of the autonomous communities against the Spanish government has intensified. Beyond the well-known coordinated offensive against the amnesty law, there have been three laws that have also been in the PP's crosshairs. Especially the migrant distribution decree that the PSOE agreed with Junts. All the Popular governments – except La Rioja – and Emiliano García-Page (PSOE) took it to the TC.

The Castilian-Manchegan president – along with Extremadura – also appealed the distribution of the bank tax, a complaint that was dismissed. The other law in the eye of the storm was the state housing law: Catalonia and the Basque Country, as well as Andalusia, the Balearic Islands, Madrid, and Galicia, opposed it. However, the Constitutional Court has made it clear that the norm does not encroach on regional competences. On the other hand, Pedro Sánchez and Isabel Díaz Ayuso are in conflict at the Constitutional Court over the Francoist past of the Madrid presidency headquarters.

Vox is left without wings

This legislature has also seen a reduction in the number of laws that parties send to the Constitutional Court. There are two main reasons: legislative production has decreased, and Vox does not have the necessary deputies – fifty – to file a declaration of unconstitutionality. Between 2020 and 2023, Santiago Abascal's party promoted 53% of the appeals that came from Carrera de San Jerónimo. Two-thirds of them were against state laws. This legislature, the PP has filed six – in the previous legislature there were sixteen, the same number it had filed against laws by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero in seven years–. And the PSOE and Sumar, for example, took the elimination of Catalan as a requirement in public healthcare in the Balearic Islands there.

And the PP's battle against Catalonia? That has also decreased. Since the July 23 elections, the Popular Party – through fifty deputies – has only challenged one law from the Parliament: the decree on tourist housing. In the previous legislature, it had taken seven Catalan laws to the TC – Vox took two–. In fact, this is the usual strategy that the Popular Party follows as a battering ram against Catalan laws when they are not in government: using the deputies in Congress to confront them. During Zapatero's presidency, they did the same with the Statute and six other laws.