July 16th has been marked in red on the calendar for weeks as a key date for the amnesty of the leaders of October 1st. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will rule on whether the law affects the financial interests of the EU, at the request of a preliminary ruling by the Court of Auditors. However, the effects of this ruling will go further. The ruling is a prerequisite that the Constitutional Court has imposed on itself to resolve the appeals for protection filed by Carles Puigdemont, Oriol Junqueras, and the rest of the former ministers, awaiting Europe to provide an argumentative cushion to justify that they be freed from criminal responsibility and that the law also apply to them. But the path to get here will not be easy: although a favorable ruling from the Constitutional Court is expected in the autumn – last June it endorsed the norm's fit within the magna carta–, the ball will once again fall into the lap of the Supreme Court, which will have the final say. However, there are very recent examples that show a slowness that could be repeated with the application of the amnesty.The Supreme Court is cryptic about the strategy they will follow, although sources consulted by ARA note that if there are very clear resolutions from Europe and the Constitutional Court, they will follow them and there will be extinction of criminal liability. However, there is an immediate precedent in which the Supreme Court has not acted with celerity. Two years ago, the high court raised a question of unconstitutionality to the TC regarding the case of a demonstrator from Girona investigated for public disorder following the protests of October 2019. On October 8, 2025, that is, nine months ago, the Constitutional Court dismissed the appeal and gave the green light to the Supreme Court to put an end to the criminal case. Despite this, as of today, there has been no movement. Nor has the TC made any move to enforce its resolution, since, according to the sources consulted, the young man's defense has not filed any execution incident. Official sources from the Supreme Court claim to have no information on the case.The precedent of the Canary Islands 

Beyond the case of Catalonia, there is an example that highlights the odyssey that enforcing a Constitutional Court ruling can become. We must travel to La Laguna, a municipality on the island of Tenerife. In April 2020, a court in Santa Cruz de Tenerife annulled the article of the statutes of the Pontificia, Real y Venerable Esclavitud del Santísimo Cristo de la Laguna association, which prevented women from becoming members, alleging that it violated the right to equality. The woman who prompted this was Teresa Laborda.In January 2022, however, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling and upheld the exclusion of women from the association, which is defined as a "religious association of knights". Laborda took the case to the Constitutional Court, which ruled in his favour in November 2024. However, a year and a half has passed and there has been no change, despite the court having blocked the multiple attempts by the association and the Bishopric of Tenerife to prevent it from being applied. Given the inaction, Laborda has filed two execution incidents with the TC, but both have been dismissed as premature.Rajoy's reform

The question is what powers the Constitutional Court has to enforce its rulings. What does the law say? The government of Mariano Rajoy, in view of the Process, carried out a reform in 2015 to give the TC execution capacity. During 2016 and 2017, Moncloa filed execution incidents before the TC because the Parliament's board admitted initiatives that unfolded the independence process – which was interpreted as a breach of a previous ruling – and the Constitutional Court forwarded the facts to the Prosecutor's Office, which filed numerous lawsuits for disobedience up to the macro-case of the Process for sedition.The law goes further and also gives powers to the TC to act ex officio: it can impose coercive fines of 3,000 to 30,000 euros – it was applied against the electoral oversight body of 1-O – or suspend authorities that do not comply with resolutions. Therefore, the Constitutional Court has legal tools, but legal sources aware of the matter assure that the TC magistrates are usually not very belligerent with other judges. Will Cándido Conde-Pumpido openly confront the Supreme Court to enforce the amnesty?Avoid the collision

Until now, the TC has wanted to avoid a direct clash with the Supreme Court. The proof is that it has refused to apply precautionary measures such as lifting the prison order for Puigdemont, which would have allowed the former president to return to Catalonia while the procedure on the appeal for protection and the case in the Supreme Court remains open. Doing so would have involved an unprecedented battle between the Supreme Court and the TC, which Conde-Pumpido has avoided. Of course, the president of the Constitutional Court has publicly warned that "all public powers are obliged to comply" with what the TC resolves.Politically, this scenario, according to various sources consulted, was addressed at the negotiation table between the PSOE and Junts before the breakdown, but it went nowhere. And here also lies the distancing between Puigdemont and José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, as sources familiar with the matter point out that the former Spanish president always conveyed high optimism about the fulfillment of the PSOE-Junts agreements, which later did not correspond to reality.The other possibility: go to Europe

The other card the Supreme Court can play is to go to the CJEU after the Constitutional Court's ruling. An unprecedented move that until now only one court has made: the Seville Court in the ERO case. After being reviewed by the TC, it raised a preliminary ruling to Luxembourg because it considered that the annulment of the sentences of Manuel Chaves and José Antonio Griñán implied a “systemic risk of impunity”.The Supreme Court could repeat a similar move in the case of the pro-independence leaders. On what grounds? What the Luxembourg court will do next week is rule on whether the October 1st referendum affected the EU's financial interests, but the Supreme Court has another argument on which Europe will not have ruled yet: it maintains that there is embezzlement because the leaders of the "Procés" saved themselves the cost of the referendum from their own pockets. "An interpretation that considered the crime of embezzlement to be amnestible would force us in the future to raise the preliminary ruling," the Supreme Court warned almost two years ago in one of its rulings.

]]>

The final stretch of the extraordinary regularization process for migrants promoted by the Spanish government is coming to an end with an open judicial front. Given the doubts raised by the Supreme Court about the measure's compatibility with European law, experts consulted by ARA agree that it is unlikely to have immediate effects on the applications submitted. While the legal world points to possible shortcomings in the processing, organizations and groups that have helped migrants with paperwork – often fighting against misinformation and lack of resources and suffering from administrative collapse– are now focusing all their efforts on ensuring that applicants can complete the procedures before the deadline expires this Tuesday.

]]>

The Supreme Court expresses doubts about the legality of the extraordinary regularization of migrants that the Spanish government has promoted and which ends this Tuesday. In two rulings to which ARA has had access, the high court questions the fit of the decree approved by Pedro Sánchez's executive within European law and gives five days to the parties involved against the process – in this case the government of Aragon and that of the Valencian Community, both from the PP – to pronounce on the suitability of raising a preliminary question to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), based in Luxembourg.

]]>

Last night, Carles Puigdemont exacted a significant price. As we explained yesterday, The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in his favor. (him, Comín, and Ponsatí) and established that the European Parliament stripped them of their parliamentary immunity with clear bias. The ruling states that the rapporteur in charge of investigating the Supreme Court's request was a Bulgarian MEP from the same political group as Vox, the party that acted as a private prosecutor in the trial of the Catalan independence leaders. This individual participated in an event entitled "Catalonia is Spain" in which he called himselfPuigdemont in prison"What happened yesterday doesn't happen very often, because the court has corrected the shortcomings in the European Parliament and the General Court of the European Union and told them to please do things properly. The president in exile celebrated it thus:"

]]>

On Tuesday I told you that the State must compensate for the damage that Renfe and Adif, as non-executive arms of the Ministry of Transport, were causing to the Catalan economy. We said that the commuter rail works aren't quick, fine, but the extraordinary financial compensation could be. Well, today it's news that The Government will demand that the State pay the bill for the railway chaos.What bill? Well, some items are very clear: the free commuter rail service decreed until the end of the month, or the cost of lifting the toll barriers on the C-32, or the cost of hiring information staff at the stations or buses and drivers for the commuter rail lines that now have to travel by bus.

]]>

It is magnificent news that the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union has endorsed the amnesty law. The end of exile and disqualification is one step closer. But it will not be the last, because when it comes to Catalan independence, what Congress may approve, what the Constitutional Court may validate, or what the EU may approve is merely an opinion to the ears of a judgmental court that lives in a state of perpetual judicial mode.How scary!andWhatever he can do, let him do.

]]>

The opinion of the Advocate General of the European Union does not imply any final decision.But it is a good indicator for the Spanish government and the Catalan separatists regarding a favorable ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union. Although not binding, the fact that the Advocate General considers that the extinction of criminal liability does not affect the financial interests of the EU and that it is also possible to grant amnesty to terrorists is an endorsement of the work carried out by the multinational majority in Congress. But let's take it step by step: how does this translate into specific cases? How does it affect former president Carles Puigdemont? And the former political prisoners led by Oriol Junqueras?

]]>

Satisfaction at Moncloa with the opinion of the EU Advocate General on the amnestyJust minutes after the ruling upholding much of the law was released, the Minister of the Presidency and Justice, Félix Bolaños, celebrated it in the halls of Congress as a "resounding victory," since the report, he pointed out, "clearly states" that the law "is in accordance with European law." Conversely, the People's Party (PP) believes the opinion of the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) "warns of a violation of the rule of law," according to the conservative Deputy Secretary for Institutional Relations, Cuca Gamarra. From Junts, former president Carles Puigdemont, who is still awaiting the application of the amnesty, asserted that the ruling "exposes" the strategy to "block the application of the law," and the Secretary General, Jordi Turull, called on the Constitutional Court to enforce its implementation. Likewise, in ERC, the party's president, Oriol Junqueras, also awaiting the full implementation of the law, celebrated the decision while awaiting the final ruling from the CJEU. Referring to Puigdemont, but without mentioning him by name, Bolaños stated that today's move "is another step in applying the amnesty to all the leaders of the Process," and argued that it should be applied "particularly to its most prominent leaders." The minister asserted that the lawyer's conclusions "reiterate" the defense of constitutionality and conformity with European law maintained by the executive branch, and emphasized that the CJEU "completely refutes" the "falsehood" of the self-amnesty. The Minister for Digital Transformation and Public Administration, Óscar López, expressed a similar sentiment, stating that the amnesty law "will be implemented as normal." In this regard, the President of the Generalitat, Salvador Illa, demanded that it be applied "swiftly and without subterfuge," and expressed his satisfaction with the resolution, which he described as a "significant step." He also called for "prudence" until the court issues its ruling. The Popular Party (PP) does not share this view, focusing on the part of the opinion that indicates the law is contrary to European legislation by restricting to two months the maximum period for the Court of Auditors to analyze an amnesty request from a defendant. While the report states that the law does not affect the EU's financial interests, defends the objective of social and political reconciliation, and denies that it constitutes a "self-amnesty," it does criticize this specific aspect. Therefore, the PP argues that the amnesty law "violates the rule of law in Spain and Europe." "These conclusions are extremely serious," noted Cuca Gamarra, who said she would await the final ruling from the CJEU. A decision that Vox has dismissed: "What European bodies say doesn't matter to us at all. We know what the coup-plotting criminals did," declared the leader of the far-right party in the Catalan Parliament, Ignacio Garriga.

]]>

When vacation planning begins, the process of finding a hotel or apartment now goes through Booking, without depending on third parties like travel agencies. This change has had many impacts on the day-to-day operations of these establishments. With Booking, they have gained visibility and transparency—reviews play a significant role in choosing one place over another—but they have also had to adapt to clauses they consider abusive. The price offered by Booking is usually the lowest because, as industry leaders criticize, the platform doesn't allow them to market their rooms cheaper on other digital platforms, not even on its website. This is without forgetting that hotels must pay a fee for each reservation, an average of 15% in Europe, although it can reach more than 20%.

]]>

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has heard firsthand the arguments for and against amnesty during two hearings devoted to examining the preliminary questions submitted by the Court of Auditors and the National Court, as provided for in Article 257 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. We have had to come this far because the Spanish political and judicial right, despite this being an eminently domestic issue, decided some time ago to take its private war to all possible continental bodies, as before to the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, in order to delay—rather than make it illusory.

]]>

Belgian jurist Koen Lenaerts (Mortsel, 1954) is the President of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the most powerful judge in Europe. He is a professor of European law at the Catholic University of Leuven, and was a visiting professor at Harvard University. He was awarded a doctorate this Friday. honoris causa from the Autonomous University of Barcelona.

]]>

We read in the ARA that the Court of Justice of the European Union (what legal experts call "the Tejúe") has ruled that "the child pension supplement intended specifically for mothers discriminates against men." That's right. A mother can automatically collect a monthly bonus of 35.90 euros per child (up to four), while a father will have to meet - the news item explains - the following requirement for having, for example, been without work for more than 120 days during the nine months prior to the birth or during the three years after."

]]>

The day begins with a helicopter crash in New York in which The pilot and the five passengers, a Catalan family, have died., residing in Barcelona, ​​​​parents and three minor children.

]]>

Last night we returned from the Puglia region of Italy, in the heel of the boot, from a six-day trip with thirty ARA subscribers.

]]>

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) Advocate General issued an opinion yesterday on the preliminary questions the Spanish Supreme Court had submitted and aligned itself with judge Pablo Llarena's theses. Here are the questions and answers about the implications of the latest European ruling on exiles.

]]>

Catalan exiles have received a first negative response from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), although it is not yet a final ruling. This Thursday the court's advocate general has issued his opinion – which is not binding, but it sets the trend for the case – on the preliminary questions Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena asked and, at first, agrees with him. Llarena is seeking to amend Belgian courts' rejection of former Catalan minister Lluís Puig's extradition and reduce European States' margin to reject a European arrest warrant. For the time being, Llarena has convinced the advocate general of the CJEU: Richard de la Tour says that Belgium cannot refuse a European arrest warrant because of the risk of violating the presumption of innocence – as it did in Lluís Puig's case – if the "systemic and generalised deficiencies" of the judicial system have not been proven on the basis of "objective, reliable, precise and duly updated data".

]]>

It was a a dense session today at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as it heard the questions raised by Spanish Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena after the Belgian courts refused the extradition of the former conseller Lluís Puig. Throughout the morning, all parties have been able to present their arguments and the European Commission, as guardian of the treaties and rules of the European Union, has defended the Spanish position. According to the Commission, Belgium should not have assessed whether or not Puig would have a fair trial in Spain when receiving the European arrest warrant, because "there is no systemic problem of rule of law" in Spain.

]]>

The European Commission wants to show Poland that it can no longer ignore the legal foundations of the European Union. On Tuesday, the EU executive activated for the first time the mechanism that allows it to withhold EU funds from a member state for failure to pay a penalty. Specifically, Brussels will withhold for now €14.5m of funds earmarked for Poland after the country refused to close the Turów lignite mine as demanded by the European authorities.

]]>

Spain already has partners to defend its position in the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the preliminary rulings against former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont and the other exiles. Romania and Poland are the only EU states that have backed Spanish Supreme Court magistrate Pablo Llarena, who questions the ability of Belgian judges to refuse to extradite former minister Lluís Puig and, by assimilation, to other exiles in Belgium. As advanced by La Razón and confirmed by sources of the defence, these two countries are interested in the case, as is Belgium, although for opposite reasons: it supports the criterion of its own courts.

]]>

A year ago came the ultimatum from Europe for Spain to curb water pollution caused by nitrates from intensive livestock farming and agriculture. The excessively lukewarm reaction when applying palliative measures in some areas has led the European Commission (EC) to go a step further and take the serious problem of slurry to court. Spain will have to respond to the Court of Justice of the EU for non-compliance with the EU directive: "The efforts of the Spanish authorities have been insufficient and unsatisfactory," says the EC in a statement.

]]>