| 2024 Amnesty Law | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Cortes Generales | |
| |
| Citation | BOE-A-2024-11776 |
| Enacted by | Congress of Deputies |
| Enacted by | Senate |
| Assented to by | Felipe VI |
| Royal assent | 10 June 2024 |
| Holding | BOE-A-2024-11776 |
| Effective | 11 June 2024 |
| Legislative history | |
| First chamber:Congress of Deputies | |
| Introduced by | PSOE |
| Introduced | 13 November 2023 |
| Passed | 14 March 2024 |
| Voting summary |
|
| Second chamber:Senate | |
| Rejected | 14 May 2024 |
| Voting summary |
|
| Final stages | |
| Senate rejection considered by theCongress of Deputies | 30 May 2024 |
| Voting summary |
|
| Related cases | |
| Constitutional Court | |
| Status: In force | |
The2024 Spanish Amnesty Law (officially, theOrganic Law 1/2024, of 10 June, of amnesty for the institutional, political, and social normalization in Catalonia) is anorganic law of Spain that was approved on 30 May 2024 and entered into force on 11 June, the same day of its publication in theOfficial State Gazette.[1][2][3] It was registered as a bill in theCongress of Deputies on 13 November 2023 by theSpanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) with support fromSumar,Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya,Junts,EH Bildu,the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV) and theGalician Nationalist Bloc (BNG).[4] Theinitiative derived from investiture agreements between theSpanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya, and between PSOE and Together for Catalunya (Junts), formalized on 2 and 9 November 2023, respectively.[5][6][7][8]
The law grants amnesty for legal proceedings and convictions connected to events arising from the Catalan independence process (procés), including theconsultation of 9 November 2014 [es], theindependence referendum of 1 October 2017—declared unlawful by Spain's Constitutional Court—and the subsequentunilateral declaration of independence.[7][8]
Upon presentation of the bill to the media, acting Minister of the PresidencyFélix Bolaños described it as "deeply constitutional", intended to "guarantee political coexistence" and "heal wounds", and stated that it had the backing of 178 deputies—those from the parliamentary groups committed to supporting Pedro Sánchez's investiture, exceptCoalición Canaria.[9][10] ThePeople's Party (PP) and Vox stated their opposition, arguing that the measure contravened the Constitution, therule of law, and theseparation of powers. On 12 November 2023, the PP organized demonstrations in Spain's fifty provincial capitals and in Ceuta and Melilla, reported to have drawn hundreds of thousands of participants.[11] Vox also promoted repeated rallies outside the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz in Madrid; press accounts noted the presence ofFrancoist symbols and slogans, and police intervened on multiple occasions, including the night of 12 November.[12][13]
The amnesty law was key in securing the support of Together for Catalonia's 7 MPs toPedro Sánchez's investiture to a third term asprime minister of Spain following the2023 Spanish general election and theensuing government formation negotiations.[14][15] The law proposal sparkednumerous protests across the streets.[16][17][18]
According to some estimates, the amnesty will affect some 350 people involved in legal proceedings related to the Catalan independence process, as well as 73 police officers prosecuted for their actions during the illegal2017 Catalan independence referendum, or in the days before or after.[19]
On 26 June 2025, theConstitutional Court of Spain dismissed the appeal filed by the oppositionPeople's Party (PP) and declared the law fully constitutional by six votes to four.[20][21]
On 22 June 2021, the coalition government of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) andUnidas Podemos, led by Prime MinisterPedro Sánchez and supported in parliament by fifteen deputies ofEsquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), grantedpardons to those convicted in the trial of theprocés, including ERC presidentOriol Junqueras, who had been imprisoned for more than three years.[22] Following the announcement, the president of theGeneralitat,Pere Aragonès (ERC), delivered an institutional statement reiterating demands foramnesty and aself-determination referendum, stating that it was "time to put an end to repression" and that the pardons "help to generate credibility on the path to negotiation", which he characterized as an implicit recognition that the convictions were unjust.[23] Junts parliamentary spokesperson Mònica Sales expressed skepticism about dialogue with the central government and rejected the view that the pardons strengthened prospects for negotiation.[23]
On 13 June 2021, demonstrations were held in Madrid's Plaza de Colón against the anticipated pardons. Leaders ofVox (Santiago Abascal), thePeople's Party (Pablo Casado), andCiudadanos (Albert Rivera) attended separately to avoid repeating the previous year's "Colón photo".[24]Rosa Díez, head of Unión 78, the organizing platform, stated that the government of Pedro Sánchez constituted "an exclusionary, sectarian, and dangerous power" and would violate the Constitution if it granted pardons to "criminals". WriterAndrés Trapiello read a manifesto describing the government as "inept, parasitic, and authoritarian" and the potential pardons as a "serious attack" on democracy.[25]
On 23 June 2021, the nine convicted leaders of theprocés were released from prison, carrying a banner reading "Freedom for Catalonia" and anEstelada flag. Some described the pardons as insufficient and called for an amnesty. The pardons did not lift the disqualification penalties, which continued to bar them from public office for the duration of the original terms.[26] At the time, the prime minister and officials of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party stated that neither an amnesty nor a self-determination referendum was compatible with the Constitution.
On 11 November 2022, the parliamentary groups of thePSOE andUnidas Podemos introduced a bill to repeal the offence ofsedition (maximum penalty of 15 years) and replace it with aggravated public disorder (maximum of five years), and to reduce penalties for embezzlement when committed without personal gain to a maximum of four years (previously twelve).\[20]\[21] These offences formed the basis of convictions for leaders who remained in Spain and charges against those who left the country.[27][28] Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez described the proposals as "risky" but necessary to address the territorial conflict in Catalonia.[29] Processed under the urgent procedure, the bill was debated and approved by the Congress of Deputies on 15 December 2022; during the session the People's Party filed arecurso de amparo with the Constitutional Court seeking suspension of the sitting, a decision the court deferred until 19 December.[30][31]
On 22 December 2022, the Senate ratified the reform approved by the Congress of Deputies. During the debate, Socialist spokesperson José María Oleaga stated that the amendments sought to align Spanish criminal law with other European jurisdictions and to promote coexistence and reconciliation in Catalonia. People's Party spokespersonJavier Maroto criticized the reform, urged PSOE senators to break party discipline, and accused Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez of reneging on campaign commitments while affirming Sánchez's democratic legitimacy. The debate also highlighted divisions within the pro-independence camp:Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya supported the reform—Mireia Cortès argued it reduced the state's punitive capacity—while Junts opposed it, contending that support would imply acknowledging the illegality of the 2017 secessionist challenge.[29]
On 23 July 2023,general elections were held in Spain. The People’s Party (PP) won a plurality with 136 seats, later increased to 137 after the overseas vote in Madrid, but the PP and Vox did not secure an absolute majority.[32] PP leaderAlberto Núñez Feijóo declared victory, asserted a “right to form a government,” and asked the PSOE not to block it.[32] Vox leaderSantiago Abascal acknowledged the right-of-centre bloc’s failure to reach a majority and stated that Pedro Sánchez could be invested with the support of “communism, coup-plotting separatists, and terrorism.”[33] PSOE leader Pedro Sánchez told supporters that “the bloc of regression has failed” and said Spain would “move forward.”[34] The following day he stated that he was confident “this democracy will find the formula for governability.”[35]
On election night, Junts stated that it would not support Pedro Sánchez’s investiture “in exchange for nothing” and demanded an amnesty and a self-determination referendum.[36] The following day, party secretary-generalJordi Turull said Junts’ votes would be used to address the political conflict between the state and Catalonia.[37] On 24 July 2023, PSC leaderSalvador Illa said onRAC 1 that, from the standpoint of the rule of law, an amnesty was not feasible.[38] On 25 July, acting government spokespersonIsabel Rodríguez expressed a similar position, stating that only the constitutional framework was acceptable in Catalonia and in Spain as a whole. On the final day of the election campaign, Sánchez answered “No” when asked in a television interview whether he would grant a referendum or an amnesty in exchange for support in an investiture vote, adding that the independence movement had not received an amnesty and that the conditional pardons maintained disqualification penalties for some leaders of the procés.[39][40]
On 4 September,Sumar leader and acting deputy prime ministerYolanda Díaz metCarles Puigdemont in Brussels, where he has resided since October 2017 after leaving Spain to avoid arrest and trial. The meeting, widely reported by the media, was the first public encounter between a member of the Spanish government and the former president of the Generalitat and Junts leader. The socialist wing of the government stated that Díaz attended in her capacity as Sumar leader, while the People’s Party and Vox criticized the meeting.[41]
On 5 September 2023, Carles Puigdemont stated in Brussels that Junts’ support for the investiture of Pedro Sánchez—or of Alberto Núñez Feijóo, then tasked by the king to attempt to form a government—was contingent on prior passage of an amnesty law, recognition of a “political conflict,” and a commitment to explore a self-determination referendum. He added, “If there is an agreement, it must be a historic agreement, a historic commitment that no Spanish regime or government has been able to achieve since the fall of Barcelona on 11 September 1714.”[42]
Following Alberto Núñez Feijóo’s unsuccessful investiture (172 votes in favour, 177 against),[43] KingFelipe VI nominated Pedro Sánchez to attempt to form a government on 3 October 2023.[44] On 6 October Sánchez publicly referred to “amnesty” in the context of negotiations with Catalan pro-independence parties for investiture support.[45] After signing a pact withSumar on 24 October to re-establish thecoalition government,[46] Sánchez formalized his position at the PSOE Federal Committee meeting on 28 October, arguing that an amnesty was necessary “in the interests of Spain and in defense of coexistence among Spaniards,” a stance endorsed by the committee. PSC leaderSalvador Illa expressed support, describing amnesty as “an exceptional measure to restore full political normality in Catalonia and Spain.”[47]
On 2 November 2023, Félix Bolaños (PSOE) andOriol Junqueras (Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya) signed an investiture agreement that included an amnesty law, the transfer ofRodalies commuter rail services, and the write-off of €15 billion of Generalitat debt to the state.[48] On 9 November, the PSOE–Junts agreement was published, also providing for an amnesty for those prosecuted in proceedings related to the procés.[49][50] On 10 November, the PSOE and the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV) signed an investiture pact—signed by Pedro Sánchez for the PSOE andAndoni Ortuzar for the PNV—and, the same day, the PSOE reached an agreement withCoalición Canaria, which did not support the amnesty.[51][52] With these accords, Sánchez secured 179 votes for the investiture scheduled for 15–16 November 2023.[53]
The law comprises an explanatory memorandum divided into six sections, 16 articles grouped into three titles, and three final provisions; the initial bill instead contained two additional provisions and one final provision.[54][55][8][56][57]
Point II of the explanatory memorandum states that the law grants amnesty for acts declared or classified as crimes, or as conduct giving rise to administrative or accounting liability, linked to theCatalan consultation of 9 November 2014 [es] and thereferendum of 1 October 2017—both declared unconstitutional byConstitutional Court judgments 31/2015 (25 February) and 114/2017 (17 October)—committed between 1 November 2011 (1 January 2012 in the initial bill) and 13 November 2023.
I
[Amnesty] is established in the legal system as an appropriate means of addressing exceptional political circumstances which, within a state governed by the rule of law, pursue the achievement of a general interest, such as the need to overcome and channel deep-rooted political and social conflicts, in the quest to improve coexistence and social cohesion, as well as to integrate diverse political sensibilities.
Amnesty has been used on numerous occasions in our legal tradition. It is not a novel approach and has many precedents in Spain. The most important, but not the only one, is the Amnesty Law of 1977 (Law 46/1977, of October 15). Furthermore, it is recognized in the constitutional order of many of the countries in our geographical area and legal sphere of influence. [...] There are also other constitutional provisions in European countries which, although they do not expressly mention amnesty, as in the case of Germany, Austria, Belgium, Ireland, and Sweden, this has not prevented their constitutionality from being affirmed. [...] From the perspective of European Union law, the institution of amnesty is perfectly standardized."
II
The events linked to theindependence process [es] "led to institutional tension that resulted in the intervention of the judiciary and social and political tension that caused a substantial part of Catalan society to become disaffected with state institutions, which has not yet disappeared and is repeatedly reignited when the multiple legal consequences that continue to arise, especially in the criminal sphere, become apparent.
"During this time, theSpanish Parliament has played a leading role in shaping the response of popular sovereignty to this independence process. A role that this organic law reaffirms... Thus, with this organic amnesty law, the Spanish Parliament is once again resorting to a constitutional mechanism that reinforces therule of law in order to provide an adequate response more than ten years after the start of the independence process, when the most acute moments of the crisis have already passed and it is time to lay the foundations for ensuring peaceful coexistence in the future. In this way, by taking this legislative policy decision, the Spanish Parliament is not only not encroaching on other areas, but, on the contrary, in exercising its powers, is taking the best possible approach to addressing a political conflict through politics. [...]
"With the approval of this organic law, the legislator therefore intends to exempt the application of current regulations to events that took place in the context of the Catalan independence process in the general interest, which is to guarantee coexistence within the rule of law and to create a social, political, and institutional context that promotes economic stability and cultural and social progress both in Catalonia and in Spain as a whole, while at the same time serving as a basis for overcoming political conflict. [...] Thus, this amnesty cannot be interpreted as a departure from our legal framework. On the contrary, it is a tool that strengthens it and looks to the future...
"This organic law is another step on a difficult but courageous and conciliatory path; a demonstration of respect for citizens and of the fact that the application of the law is necessary but, on occasions, insufficient to resolve a long-standing political conflict. Therefore, this amnesty constitutes a political decision adopted under the principle of justice, with the understanding that the instruments available to a state governed by the rule of law are not, and should not be, immutable; since it is the law that serves society and not the other way around, and therefore it must be able to be updated and adapted to the context of each moment."
III
"The legal and political context in which this amnesty is being approved is very different from that in which the last two laws implementing this measure in our country were approved. [...] Since 1978, Spain has had aconstitution comparable to those of neighboring countries, which guarantees individual fundamental rights and preserves the ideological and political rights of all... In accordance with this framework, an amnesty law can only be based on the strength of the democratic system, which thus demonstrates its capacity for reconciliation through a sovereign act of the Cortes Generales, whose legitimacy is based on two pillars of a different nature: on the one hand, the constitutionality of the measure and, on the other, the need to address an exceptional situation in the general interest, committing to a future of understanding, dialogue, and negotiation between different political, ideological, and national sensibilities.
"This is the general legal framework within which this amnesty law is conceived, with the clear understanding that, although there can be no democracy outside the rule of law, it is necessary to create the conditions for politics, dialogue, and parliamentary channels to play a leading role in the search for solutions to a political issue that has been a recurring feature of our history. [...] This process is also inspired by the Constitutional Court's interpretation of the political obligations of public authorities, stating that "the Constitution does not and cannot expressly address all the problems that may arise in the constitutional order [...]. Therefore, it is the public authorities, and especially the territorial powers that make up our autonomous state, who are called upon to resolve the problems that arise in this area through dialogue and cooperation" (ruling 42/2014, of March 24).
IV
"The constitutionality of amnesty was affirmed by theConstitutional Court of Spain in its ruling 147/1986, dated November 25, 1986, specifically regarding the application of theLaw 46/1977. This ruling explicitly states that "there is no direct constitutional restriction on this matter." TheConstitution of Spain does not prohibit the legal institution of amnesty but only a specific form of theright of grace, namely generalpardons, which have a distinctly different legal nature from an organic amnesty law, as pardons are an executive prerogative. The same ruling 147/1986 elaborates on this, stating that "it is erroneous to reason about pardons and amnesty as figures whose difference is merely quantitative, as they are in a relationship of qualitative differentiation."
"It is reasonable to infer that the 1978 constitutional framers did not prohibit the institution of amnesty. This allows us to conclude that amnesty, far from being unconstitutional, forms part of the foundational pact of Spanish democracy and is a prerogative of theCortes Generales, which represent the entire Spanish people, the holder ofnational sovereignty."
"It should be emphasized that amnesty does not affect the principle ofseparation of powers or the exclusivity of jurisdiction provided for in Article 117 of the Constitution, as the judiciary is subject to the rule of law. An organic law, within the parameters outlined, provides for exemptions from liability, and it is the responsibility of judges, courts, theCourt of Auditors, or administrative authorities handling or having handled proceedings, processes, files, and cases affected by the amnestied acts to apply it to each specific case. This has been implicitly recognized in Spain's legal system, which routinely incorporates the concept of amnesty in various provisions."
"Lastly, it is noteworthy that amnesty is contemplated in over thirty international agreements signed by Spain concerning the transfer of convicted persons or extraditions, with more than twenty of these having the status of treaties or international conventions, implying prior review of their full constitutionality."
V
"The principle of equality does not require the amnesty to have universal scope but rather ensures no discrimination among individuals covered by the enabling conditions of the law (in this case, acts leading to various types of liability related to the Catalanindependence process [es]). As clarified by the highest interpreter of the Constitution, the principle of equality applies when there is a "substantial identity of legal situations," and no comparison can be made "between legal situations that were not equated by the norms creating them" (ruling 194/1999, October 25, 1999), based on the principles of justification and reasonableness (rulings 62/1982, October 15, 1982; 112/1996, June 24, 1996; 102/1999, May 31, 1999). This organic law respects the principle of equality by objectively and justifiably defining its scope in accordance with constitutional values, without arbitrarily excluding cases with substantial identity."
"Framed as a singular law addressing an exceptional situation, this organic amnesty law is guided by the principles of reasonableness, proportionality, and adequacy. Its reasonableness stems from the objective and reasonable justification of its singularity, linked to the need to overcome the high political tension in Catalan society, particularly intense since 2011 (2012 in the initial bill). This approach returns the resolution of the political conflict to the channels of political discussion. The law's proportionality derives from the specificity of the acts declared or classified as crimes and behaviors to be amnestied, linked to acts within a defined timeframe. This connects to the principle of adequacy and the law's purpose, tied to the optimization mandate of Article 9 of the Constitution,[Note 1] which applies to all public authorities, particularly the legislator, who defines criminal offenses, repeals them, and, as in this case, approves an amnesty law with a legitimate and constitutional purpose. This purpose, due to its legal nature or the variety of ongoing legal proceedings at the time of enactment, could not be achieved through other legal mechanisms such as pardons or Penal Code reforms."
VI
The law consists of 16 articles, divided into three titles, and three final provisions (two additional provisions and one final provision in the initial bill).
Regarding Article 1.1, it should be clarified that extending amnesty to criminal acts potentially committed in defense of legality and constitutional order does not imply any discredit or reproach to the affected groups. It does not criminalize public officials who acted in defense of public order, as thepresumption of innocence is a fundamental principle of the Spanish legal system. Instead, it aims to alleviate the legal situation of those prosecuted and thereby reduce tensions arising from events framed in a specific moment and resulting from tensions spanning over a decade. The law also seeks to lay a solid foundation to continue mitigating the consequences of a conflict that should never have occurred and, despite recent steps, remains latent.
Article 1.1 (included inTitle I "Objective Scope and Exclusions") establishes the law's scope: "acts leading to criminal, administrative, or accounting liability, carried out in the context of the consultations held inCatalonia onNovember 9, 2014, andOctober 1, 2017, their preparation, or consequences, provided they were carried out between November 1, 2011 (January 1, 2012, in the initial bill) and November 13, 2023, as well as actions carried out in the context of the so-called Catalan independence process between these dates, even if not directly related to these consultations or carried out after their respective holding." The acts to be amnestied are then specified, divided into six categories:
| Initial bill | Final text |
|---|---|
| a) Acts committed with the intention of claiming, promoting, or procuring the secession or independence of Catalonia, as well as those contributing to achieving such purposes. [...] b) Acts committed with the intention of convening, promoting, or procuring the holding of the consultations held in Catalonia on November 9, 2014, and October 1, 2017, by those lacking competence or whose convening or holding was declared unlawful, as well as those contributing to their achievement. [...]c) Acts of disobedience, of any nature, public disorders, attacks against authority, its agents, or public officials, or resistance carried out to enable the holding of the public consultations referred to in paragraph b) of this article or their consequences, as well as any other acts classified as crimes committed with the same intention. [...]d) Acts of disobedience, of any nature, public disorders, attacks against authority, its agents, or public officials, resistance, or other acts against public order and peace carried out to show support for the objectives and purposes described in the preceding paragraphs or for those prosecuted or convicted for committing any of the crimes covered by this article.e) Actions carried out during police operations aimed at hindering or preventing the commission of acts leading to criminal or administrative liability covered by this article.f) Acts committed to favor, procure, or facilitate any of the actions leading to criminal, administrative, or accounting liability contemplated in the preceding paragraphs of this article, as well as any others materially connected to such actions. | a) Acts committed with the intention of claiming, promoting, or procuring the secession or independence of Catalonia, as well as those contributing to achieving such purposes. [...] b) Acts committed with the intention of convening, promoting, or procuring the holding of the consultations held in Catalonia on November 9, 2014, and October 1, 2017, by those lacking competence or whose convening or holding was declared unlawful, as well as those contributing to their achievement. [...]c) Acts of disobedience, of any nature, public disorders, attacks against authority, its agents, or public officials, or resistance carried out to enable the holding of the public consultations referred to in paragraph b) of this article or their consequences, as well as any other acts classified as crimes committed with the same intention. [...]d) Acts of disobedience, of any nature, public disorders, attacks against authority, its agents, or public officials, resistance, or other acts against public order and peace carried out to show support for the objectives and purposes described in the preceding paragraphs or for those prosecuted or convicted for committing any of the crimes covered by this article.e) Actions carried out during police operations aimed at hindering or preventing the commission of acts leading to criminal or administrative liability covered by this article.f) Acts committed to favor, procure, or facilitate any of the actions leading to criminal, administrative, or accounting liability contemplated in the preceding paragraphs of this article, as well as any others materially connected to such actions. |
Article 2 lists the acts excluded from the amnesty:
| Initial bill | Final text |
|---|---|
| a) Intentional acts against persons resulting in death, abortion, or fetal injuries, loss or uselessness of an organ or limb, loss or uselessness of a sense, impotence, sterility, or severe deformity. b) Acts classified as crimes of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, provided they exceed a minimum threshold of severity. c) Acts classified as terrorism crimes punished in Chapter VII of Title XXII of Book II of the Penal Code, provided a final judgment has been issued and they consist of any conduct described in Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of March 15, 2017. f) Crimes in whose execution racist, antisemitic, anti-Roma, or other forms of discrimination based on the victim's religion or beliefs, ethnicity or race, sex, age, sexual orientation or gender identity, gender reasons, aporophobia, social exclusion, illness, or disability were found, regardless of whether such conditions or circumstances actually applied to the person affected by the conduct. e) Crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union. d) Crimes of treason and against the peace or independence of the State and related to National Defense in Title XXIII of Book II of the Penal Code. | a) Intentional acts against persons resulting in death, abortion, or fetal injuries, loss or uselessness of an organ or limb, loss or uselessness of a sense, impotence, sterility, or severe deformity. b) Acts classified as crimes of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, except those treatments that do not exceed a minimum severity threshold by not being suitable to humiliate or degrade a person, show a diminishment of their human dignity, or cause fear, anguish, or inferiority in a way capable of breaking their moral or physical resistance. c) Acts that, due to their purpose, can be classified as terrorism under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of March 15, 2017, on combating terrorism and which intentionally caused serious human rights violations, particularly those regulated in Articles 2 and 3 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights and in international humanitarian law. d) Acts classified as crimes in whose execution racist, antisemitic, anti-Roma, or other forms of discrimination based on the victim's religion or beliefs, ethnicity or race, sex, age, sexual orientation or gender identity, gender reasons, aporophobia, social exclusion, illness, or disability were found, regardless of whether such conditions or circumstances actually applied to the person affected by the conduct. e) Acts classified as crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union. f) Acts classified as crimes of treason and against the peace or independence of the State and related to National Defense in Title XXIII of Book II of the Penal Code, provided there was both an effective and real threat and effective use of force against Spain's territorial integrity or political independence, as established in theUnited Nations Charter or Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nations General Assembly of October 24, 1970, containing the declaration on principles of international law concerning friendly relations and cooperation among States in accordance with theUnited Nations Charter. g) Acts classified as crimes against the International Community included in Title XXIV of Book II of the Penal Code. |
The six articles underTitle II "Effects" address the law's effects:
Additionally:
Title III "Competence and Procedure" covers the last eight articles (9 to 16). Article 9 ("Competence for the application of the amnesty") establishes in paragraph 3 that "an act leading to criminal, administrative, or accounting liability can only be considered amnestied when declared so by a final resolution issued by the competent authority under the provisions of this law." Article 10 ("Preferential and urgent processing") mandates that decisions by judicial, administrative, or accounting bodies responsible for applying the amnesty "will be adopted within a maximum period of two months, without prejudice to subsequent appeals, which will not have suspensive effects." Article 11 establishes the procedure in the criminal sphere (dismissal during the investigation or intermediate phase; dismissal or acquittal during the oral trial phase; review of final judgments during the execution phase), Article 12 in the contentious-administrative sphere, Article 13 in the accounting sphere, and Article 14 in the administrative sphere.
Article 15 refers to the "timeframe for recognizing the rights included in this law," set at five years, and Article 16 addresses appeals ("Appeals provided for in the legal system may be lodged against resolutions that decide on the extinction of criminal liability or administrative and accounting infractions under this law").
The first final provision amends Article 39 of Organic Law 2/1982, of May 12, of theCourt of Auditors, establishing in paragraph 3 that "those who committed acts amnestied under the terms established in the law will be exempt from liability." The second final provision amends paragraph 1 of Article 130 of the Penal Code, adding amnesty as a ground for extinguishing criminal liability. The third final provision states that "this law will enter into force on the same day of its publication in theBoletín Oficial del Estado" (June 11, 2024).
The processing of the amnesty law was carried out under an urgent procedure, halving the usual deadlines for submitting amendments, the government's pronouncement on the bill, and the preparation of the preliminary report by the deputies of the drafting committee. The legislative process followed these stages:[58][59]
ThePP andVox criticized the Brussels meeting betweenYolanda Díaz, leader ofSumar and deputy prime minister, and "fugitive from justice"Carles Puigdemont, former president of theGeneralitat of Catalonia. "Stop mocking Spaniards: what are you willing to do to stay in power?" wroteCuca Gamarra on X, whileIsabel Díaz Ayuso called the meeting "undignified."Vox leaderSantiago Abascal described it as "extremely serious," stating, "Today, the Spanish government is sitting with a fugitive from justice, something that does not happen anywhere in the world where legality and citizens' dignity are respected."[41]
Former socialist prime ministerFelipe González opposed the amnesty, arguing it would "condemn the democratic regime as guilty of what happened" in the2017 Catalan declaration of independence. He also condemned the previous day's meeting between Yolanda Díaz and Carles Puigdemont in Brussels.[70] Two days later,Alfonso Guerra, deputy prime minister under González (1982–1991), expressed similar views.[71]
Hundreds of people, summoned via social media, gathered in Madrid, Barcelona, and other cities on Sunday to protest against the amnesty law.[72]
Over 100,000 people, according to the Guardia Urbana, demonstrated in Barcelona in favor of Catalan independence (and the amnesty) during theDiada.[73]
Former Prime MinisterJosé María Aznar called for mobilization against the amnesty, considering it "an operation to dismantle the Constitution, destroy its legitimacy, and reversea great history of success."[74] The government spokesperson labeled Aznar a "coup plotter."[75]
ThePP andVox protested theCongress of Deputies' approval of a regulation reform allowing deputies to use co-official languages recognized in their respective Statutes of Autonomy. Congress PresidentFrancina Armengol, a socialist, permitted their use during the debate, with several speakers using Catalan, Basque, and Galician. When the first deputy used a co-official language (a socialist speaking in Galician), all Vox deputies left the chamber, placing their translation headsets on the empty seat of Prime MinisterPedro Sánchez, who was absent in Brussels.[76]
A rally in Madrid, convened by the PP, protested the amnesty law.[77]
During the first day of theinvestiture [es] debate forAlberto Núñez Feijóo, president of thePP, he devoted much of his speech to rejecting the amnesty law. The response came not fromPedro Sánchez but from socialist deputyÓscar Puente, causing outrage among PP deputies.[78] Feijóo failed to secure the investiture as prime minister, receiving 172 votes in favor and 177 against.[43]
A demonstration in Barcelona, organized bySocietat Civil Catalana, protested the amnesty law, attended by leaders of the PP andVox.[79]
Boos and jeers targeted President Sánchez during the military parade forNational Day of Spain.[80]
A rally in Madrid'sPlaza de Colón, convened by Vox and affiliated organizations likeDENAES [es], sawSantiago Abascal justify it as an act "against Sánchez's coup," claiming that "the coup perpetrated in 2017 by the treacherous Generalitat is now being attempted from the Moncloa Palace."[81]
In a joint event with Núñez Feijóo, former Prime MinisterJosé María Aznar urged action to save theSpanish Constitution of 1978 from its "liquidation." He called candidatePedro Sánchez "a danger to Spanish constitutional democracy," stating, "Let those who can speak, speak. Let those who can act, act. Each with their responsibility." Feijóo described the amnesty as "the greatest humiliation in Spain for much of its centuries-long history."[82]
Hundreds of protesters, summoned via social media the previous day, gathered in the afternoon and evening outside the PSOE's federal headquarters onCalle Ferraz [es] in Madrid to protest the amnesty. The rally was supported byVox, which stated, "This is just the beginning. Permanent mobilization against the greatest betrayal." The ultracatholic groupHazteOir [es] also backed the protest. Police blocked the street for several hours, with slogans like "Sánchez to prison, no amnesty, no forgiveness" and chants against KingFelipe VI.[83][84]
At a PP event in Vitoria, Núñez Feijóo accused Pedro Sánchez of "buying the government" with public funds, adding, "Trading votes for impunity is corruption."[85]
For the second consecutive day, hundreds gathered in the afternoon and evening outside the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz. According toEl País, the protest was backed by Vox,HazteOir [es], and the recently formed groupRevuelta, which presents itself as "a youth movement [...] seeking to fuel the revolutionary spirit" of "patriotic youth" and is linked to Vox, with its most active social media members belonging to the party.[84]
A PP-organized rally in Valencia against the amnesty saw Núñez Feijóo declare, "We will not stand still, they will not silence us."[86]
PP leader Núñez Feijóo called the amnesty "the greatest democratic setback in our history" and announced protests in all 52 provincial capitals on Sunday, November 12, at noon, stating, "They will not silence us, they will not stop us."[87]
TheGeneral Council of the Judiciary issued a statement against the amnesty, backed by the majority of its members.[88]
The four judicial associations issued a document criticizing the creation of a parliamentary commission to investigate allegedlawfare against Catalan independentists, included in thePSOE–Junts agreement [es] signed that day, arguing it undermines judicial independence and therule of law.[89] The document stated that the agreement onlawfare "could, in practice, mean subjecting judicial procedures and decisions to parliamentary review, clearly interfering with judicial independence and breaching the separation of powers."[90]
PP leader Núñez Feijóo harshly criticized the PSOE–Junts agreement, calling it "another milestone in the erosion of Spanish democracy" and comparing it to attacks like the23-F,ETA terrorism, or the2017 Catalan declaration of independence, while calling for mobilization for the November 12 protests.[91] Earlier, Madrid Community PresidentIsabel Díaz Ayuso claimed the pact turned Spain "into a dictatorship."[92]
Vox leaderSantiago Abascal declared after the PSOE–Junts pact: "The definitive coup against democracy has been launched. The PSOE and Junts coup plotters have sealed their threat to national unity... The autocrat of the previous legislature is not content; in this legislature, he wants to be, outright, a dictator... The dictator on trial or those opposing this coup in jail."[92]
The third day ofviolent incidents outside the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz was led by far-right groups.[93][94]
After learning that Pedro Sánchez secured the investiture with 179 deputies following agreements with thePNV andCanarian Coalition, PP secretary-generalCuca Gamarra called Sánchez’s investiture "an electoral fraud" and the rule of law "eroded," urging "all outraged citizens" to join the November 12 protests.[95]
Former socialist Prime MinisterJosé Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, in an interview withLa Vanguardia, defended thePSOE–Junts agreement [es] as "a great state pact that the PP should join" and supported the amnesty.[96]
.jpg)
Hundreds of thousands gathered in all provincial capitals, convened by the PP, "In defense of the equality of all Spaniards," as stated in the manifesto read at each event. Its first paragraph reads: "Today, Spaniards are heard with one voice from squares across the country. Today, Spain is a clamor for equality, dignity, justice, coexistence, and diversity. In every corner of our territory, we say: No to privilege. No to impunity. No to amnesty."[11]
Alberto Núñez Feijóo, who led the Madrid rally atPuerta del Sol, demanded new elections, stating, "We will not be silenced until we speak in elections."[12]
For the tenth consecutive day, over a thousand people gathered outside the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz, chanting slogans like "Spanish press, manipulative," "Pedro Sánchez, we want your neck," "Marlaska and Puigdemont are the same garbage," "Let Txapote vote for you," and "If you have the guts, call elections."[97]
The PP’s deputy secretary of organization stated that "for the humiliation our country is enduring, for allowing the humiliation of therule of law, for allowing the humiliation of theseparation of powers, essential in any democracy, I believe Pedro Sánchez himself should leave our country in a car trunk."[98]
TheSupreme Court’s Governing Chamber issued a statement defendingjudicial independence and theseparation of powers, implicitly referring to thelawfare in thePSOE–Junts agreement [es].
TheCEOE, without mentioning amnesty, warned of the "serious damage" to the separation of powers and legal certainty posed by the PSOE’s agreements for Sánchez’s investiture, emphasizing their direct impact on the principle of equality among Spaniards.
ThePP passed a reform in theSenate, where it holds an absolute majority, amending its regulations to delay the amnesty law’s processing. With 147 votes in favor and 116 against, the reform empowers the Senate Table to decide whether initiatives are processed urgently or through ordinary procedures. The PP, led byAlberto Núñez Feijóo, argued the reform was necessary for thorough deliberation and to avoid legal issues, as seen with the"only yes is yes" law. ThePSOE and its allies, who sought urgent processing in Congress, accused the PP of illegal obstruction and authoritarianism.Vox andUPN supported the reform.[99][100]
British newspaperThe Guardian published an editorial supporting the amnesty, highlighting the courage of the prime minister, who had already shown with pardons that "they undoubtedly helped defuse poisonous confrontations that led to Spain’s worst constitutional crisis since the return of democracy [...] Pedro Sánchez is right to bet again."[101]
SocialistJosep Borrell, EU High Representative and former minister under Sánchez, stated in Brussels that the amnesty bill aimed to "wipe the slate clean." He said, "Amnesties are done for this purpose: historically, they mark the end of a conflict phase to wipe the slate clean. All amnesties have this goal. Naturally, this one does too." However, the previous day, he had expressed discomfort with thePSOE–Junts agreement [es].[102]
Vox filed a complaint with theSupreme Court against actingPrime MinisterPedro Sánchez and formerPresident of the Generalitat of CataloniaCarles Puigdemont for alleged crimes of bribery, cover-up or collaboration with terrorism, usurpation of judicial functions, and prohibited negotiations by public officials. The complaint also targeted their respective parties,PSOE andJunts, labeling them "coup organizations." Vox requested, as a precautionary measure, that the Supreme Court suspend Sánchez's investiture session scheduled for the next day. The complaint did not include treason charges against Sánchez, as such charges require approval by an absolute majority in theCongress of Deputies per the Constitution.[103]
Hundreds of judges and prosecutors gathered outside the provincial courts of Seville, Jaén, Huelva, Cádiz, and Salamanca to express "concern" over the amnesty law. The associationJudges and Magistrates for Democracy did not participate, stating that "defending the separation of powers requires maintaining an image of impartiality and neutrality that these acts do not guarantee."[104]
The amnesty law dominated the first day of theinvestiture [es] debate forPedro Sánchez, who defended it as a "bet on a future of reconciliation and harmony" through "dialogue, forgiveness, and understanding" (phrases later criticized by theJunts spokesperson).[105] Sánchez acknowledged that "circumstances are what they are, and we must make a virtue of necessity."Alberto Núñez Feijóo, PP leader, countered that "the amnesty does not improve coexistence; it destroys it by crushing constitutionalist Catalans and dividing the country." He concluded, "This is a legitimate investiture majority. I will say it as many times as necessary. But it is also true that your pacts stem from a massive fraud against citizens. You will be president by doing the opposite of what you promised during the campaign."[106][107]
Vox leaderSantiago Abascal called Sánchez’s government not only "illegitimate" but also "illegal," accusing it of a "coup d’état" and "dictatorship," comparing Sánchez toNero and the "socialist"Hitler. He refused to retract these statements when prompted by the Congress president. Vox deputies then left the chamber, unwilling to hear Sánchez’s "lies." The socialist parliamentary group requested that Abascal’s offensive remarks against the PSOE and its leader be removed from theDiario de sesiones [es], which the Congress president approved. After leaving, Abascal joined far-right groups attempting to block Congress, where he was cheered with shouts of "President, president!" and later joined the thirteenth consecutive night of protests outside the PSOE headquarters onCalle Ferraz [es] in Madrid.[108][109]
The Supreme Court rejected Vox’s request to suspend Sánchez’s investiture session. The complaint failed to specify the alleged crime committed by Sánchez or the grounds for the complaint, leading to its dismissal.[110][111]
On the second day of Sánchez’s investiture debate, spokespersons from four parliamentary groups (EH Bildu,PNV,BNG, andPSOE) supported the amnesty law, as didSumar,ERC, andJunts the previous day.UPN andCanarian Coalition opposed it. Sánchez was invested as prime minister with 179 votes in favor and 171 against.[112] WhenAlberto Núñez Feijóo congratulated Sánchez with a handshake, he said, "This is a mistake, and you will be responsible."[113]
That night and into the early hours, the most violent incidents since the protests began occurred outside the PSOE headquarters on Calle Ferraz. Far-right groups overturned and burned containers and threw objects at riot police and journalists, who were heckled with shouts of "Spanish press, manipulative." Vox deputyJavier Ortega Smith was present during this fourteenth day of protests.[114] The following morning, far-right groups attempted to block access to thePalacio de las Cortes and harassed and attempted to assault socialist deputies, who required police protection.[115]
The digital newspaperInfolibre [es] revealed a manifesto signed by about fifty retired military officers (anonymously) claiming the amnesty law is unconstitutional because it "eliminates equality before the law for all Spaniards and erases crimes committed by those who staged the coup in Catalonia." It called on "those responsible for defending the constitutional order" (implied to be the Armed Forces) to "dismiss the Prime Minister and call general elections."[Note 2][116][117][118]
During a debate in theBasque Parliament,lehendakariIñigo Urkullu stated that the amnesty bill "offers politics an opportunity to restart a project of coexistence through democratic means" and accused Vox of "encouraging a street uprising that disregards all democratic rules," calling it the greatest threat to democracy in Spain.[119]
Former Prime MinisterMariano Rajoy, at an event in Madrid attended byAlberto Núñez Feijóo, called the amnesty bill unconstitutional and accused Sánchez’s pact with independentists of being a "deliberate plan to undermine judicial independence in Spain." He blamed Sánchez for causing "the greatest period of polarization" in Spain’s memory.[120]
TheCentre d'Estudis d'Opinió [es] (CEO) of the Generalitat of Catalonia published a survey showing 60% of Catalans supported the amnesty, with 31% opposed. The survey also indicated a decline in electoral support for pro-independence parties, which would not secure an absolute majority in theParliament of Catalonia, and a drop in support for Catalan independence (41% in favor, 52% against). ThePSC widened its lead as Catalonia’s most-voted party.[121]
Around one million people, according to organizers, or 170,000, per the Government Delegation, gathered in Madrid’sPlaza de la Cibeles to oppose the amnesty and Sánchez’s government (sworn in the previous day), chanting "Sánchez to prison!" and "Traitor government!" The rally’s slogan was: "Not in my name: no amnesty, no self-determination, for freedom, unity, and equality!" Leaders of the PP and Vox attended separately. Some protesters blocked the A-6 highway for two hours and attempted to reach thePalacio de la Moncloa, shouting, "Sánchez, you bastard, come out to the balcony."[122][123][124]
The legal advisors of theCongress of Deputies endorsed the constitutionality of the amnesty bill, finding no obstacles to its processing. Vox accused them of prevarication for legitimizing a "blow to the rule of law." The PP requested the recusal of the Congress’s chief legal advisor, Fernando Galindo.[125]
TheEuropean Parliament held a plenary session, requested by the PP and Vox, to debate the amnesty bill. EU Justice CommissionerDidier Reynders stated that "the Commission will continue to monitor this issue and follow its development," but noted that the Catalan conflict is "an internal Spanish matter" and would only comment once the law is finalized.[126]
The PP held another anti-amnesty rally in Madrid under the sloganIn Defense of the Constitution at theTemple of Debod, near the PSOE headquarters onCalle Ferraz [es]. Around 15,000 people attended, according to organizers.Alberto Núñez Feijóo criticized the previous day’s meeting in Geneva between PSOE and Junts representatives with an international "mediator" (an El Salvador diplomat), stating, "This government is not with the Constitution. We will not accept the opacity with which Sánchez meets and negotiates. Spain’s dignity and democracy are not negotiated in secrecy. Having an El Salvador citizen decide Spain’s future is a humiliation. I demand, on behalf of Spain, an end to this nonsense." He announced further mobilizations.[127]
During aEuropean Parliament debate on the Spanish EU presidency ending December 31,Manfred Weber, leader of theEuropean People’s Party from theCSU, launched a strong attack on the amnesty bill, countered byPedro Sánchez.Carles Puigdemont, a potential amnesty beneficiary, also spoke, demanding Sánchez "keep his promises."[128]
Legal advisors of the Congress’s Justice Committee deemed parts of the amnesty bill unconstitutional, contradicting the favorable report from November 20 by the Congress’s chief legal advisor.[129]
The PP organized an anti-amnesty rally in Madrid’s Plaza de España, two days before theCongress of Deputies voted on the bill after the amendment process.[130]
The president of theHigh Court of Justice of Catalonia, Jesús María Barrientos, sharply criticized the amnesty bill during an institutional speech at the swearing-in of 44 new judges assigned to Catalan courts. He stated that it "privileges a few over the citizenry as a whole" and cannot be "wielded as a tool for pacification, but rather for discord." He emphasized that a democratic society requires "orderly coexistence" through respect for the constitutional order and the rule of law, asserting that "no one, no person, entity, or organization, no matter how powerful or backed by votes, is above the law." He added that the law must be applied "without spaces for impunity" that would benefit only some.[131]
A leaked draft (finalized on March 15–16) of theVenice Commission of theCouncil of Europe’s opinion on the amnesty bill endorsed "the possibility of an amnesty law" and stated that "national unity and social and political reconciliation are legitimate objectives." However, it criticized the urgent processing and noted that the law "has caused a deep and virulent division among the political class, institutions, judiciary, academia, and Spanish society," questioning its reconciliation goal. It suggested considering a constitutional amendment for such measures.[132]
Another anti-amnesty rally took place in Madrid’s Plaza de la Cibeles under the slogan "There are plenty of reasons! Sánchez, resign!" The manifesto, agreed upon by around 100 civic organizations with PP and Vox support (Feijóo did not attend, but Abascal did), stated: "The dizzying succession of inadmissible decisions, abject agreements, and shameful justifications seeks to anesthetize society, reduce its capacity to react, exhaust the population, and ultimately make us accept as inevitable a process whose ultimate goal is to perpetuate power and exclude at least half of Spain’s citizens from access to government."[133]
TheVenice Commission released its report on the amnesty law, aligning with the leaked draft. It did not disqualify the law but raised significant objections.[134]
The Senate’s legal advisors issued a report deeming the amnesty law unconstitutional but acknowledged that the Senate cannot block its processing.[135]
TheGeneral Council of the Judiciary, with 9 of 16 members in favor, approved a report opposing the amnesty law.[136]
The Senate’s General Committee of Autonomous Communities sawPere Aragonès, president of theGeneralitat of Catalonia, defend the amnesty law, while PP regional presidents opposed it. Neither the Basquelehendakari nor PSOE regional presidents attended, though PSOE leaders from Extremadura and Andalusia appeared in a different Senate chamber that day.[137]
The PP held an anti-amnesty rally at Madrid’sPuerta de Alcalá.[138]
On the day theCongress of Deputies definitively approved the amnesty law, the debate was highly tense, marked by insults, particularly betweenSumar andVox. Vox leaderSantiago Abascal defended Israel and accused Sumar deputyGerardo Pisarello of "deeply hating Spain." Pisarello responded, defending Palestine and criticizing Abascal for meeting "the butchers of Rafah," referring to his encounter with Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu.[139]
Far-right insults followed, with shouts of "out!" The Congress president reminded deputies that "being a democrat means listening to those who think differently," lamenting, "This is a spectacle the people don’t deserve," while calling two deputies (from PP and Vox) to order for clashing with left-wing deputies who stood up.
The session paused before PSOE deputyArtemi Rallo’s speech, who called Vox "neo-Nazis meeting with Netanyahu" and warned the PP of being "devoured by the neo-fascist beast roaming Spain and Europe." PP leaderAlberto Núñez Feijóo opposed the amnesty, stating, "We have witnessed the death certificate of the PSOE. Today, from the Spanish Constitution, we say: keep the ambition of one man; we were not elected to lie."[140]
Several PP-led autonomous community presidents, led byIsabel Díaz Ayuso, announced plans to file anunconstitutionality appeal [es] with theConstitutional Court.[141]Emiliano García-Page, socialist president ofCastilla-La Mancha, also announced the next day his intent to file an unconstitutionality appeal.[142]
Catalan independentist leadersOriol Junqueras andJordi Turull celebrated the law’s approval. Turull,Junts’s secretary-general, called it "a great victory for the independence movement" as they had "not renounced anything." He added that the law’s passage "is an opportunity" for judges to align with "European standards."[143]
TheConstitutional Court annulled the PP’s Senate regulation reform that delayed the amnesty law’s processing, arguing that the Senate cannot alter deadlines set by Congress and the government, as its role is secondary in the legislative process. Despite this, the PP continues to push for new Senate reforms to strengthen its counterbalance to the government, including requiring the prime minister to appear monthly in the Senate and allowing senators to challenge Congress’s legislative processing decisions.[144][145]
On June 26, 2025, theConstitutional Court upheld the amnesty law by a 6–4 vote, with three minor corrections. The ruling justified the amnesty as having a legitimate and reasonable purpose: reducing political tension in Catalonia and fostering social cohesion. The Court deemed the law in the public interest and constitutional, noting that the legislature can decide on matters not expressly prohibited by the Constitution, based on the democratic principle, without evaluating the law’s political motivations.[146][147]
The Court stated that the law is not arbitrary and that amnesties are constitutionally admissible in exceptional situations, such as the constitutional crisis from Catalonia’s secessionist process.[148][147]
The three minor aspects deemed unconstitutional were: Article 1.1, which amnestied only "acts committed with the intention of claiming, promoting, or procuring Catalonia’s secession or independence," excluding those acting against theprocés (e.g., police preventing the referendum), violating theprinciple of equality; Article 1.3, setting the law’s temporal scope, initially covering acts post-approval but amended to apply only until November 2023; and Articles 13.2 and 13.3, which the Court said must consider all parties affected by theCourt of Auditors, not just the Prosecutor’s Office and public entities.[149]
The ruling did not address the Supreme Court’s non-application of the law to leaders likeCarles Puigdemont andOriol Junqueras for embezzlement, noting these cases are still under appeal.[147]
On July 29, 2024, theCourt of Auditors raised eightpreliminary questions to theCourt of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) about the amnesty law, arguing that diverting public funds for theprocés may have affected EU financial interests and that the law is "very difficult to reconcile" with EU efforts to prevent fraud and corruption impunity.[150]
On July 30, theHigh Court of Justice of Catalonia raised apreliminary question to the CJEU, arguing that the amnesty law may contravene EU anti-corruption and anti-fraud regulations.[151]
On September 6, 2024, theNational Court raised apreliminary question to the CJEU regarding the amnesty law’s application to twelveCommittees for the Defense of the Republic members prosecuted forterrorism. It argued that the law may contravene Directive 2017/541, which sets penalties for participation in terrorist organizations.[152]
On February 10, 2025, the Penal Court No. 3 ofVilanova i la Geltrú raised ninepreliminary questions to the CJEU, arguing that the amnesty law’s primary purpose was to secure Pedro Sánchez’s investiture rather than serve the general interest, potentially violating principles ofequality,non-discrimination, and therule of law.[153]
On June 10, 2025, theEuropean Commission argued in its submissions to the CJEU regarding theCourt of Auditors’spreliminary question that the amnesty law did not serve a "general interest" and appeared to be aself-amnesty [es], as it was part of a political agreement to secure Sánchez’s investiture with votes from its beneficiaries.[154]
On July 15, 2025, theEuropean Commission again questioned before the CJEU whether the amnesty law served a "general interest," suggesting it could be aself-amnesty [es] to secure Sánchez’s investiture with support from its beneficiaries. It also questioned the law’s compliance withEU law, principles oflegal certainty,equality before the law, and EU values.[155][156]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)