The plenary session is still very fractured before the presentation that points out that the Government evaded parliamentary control and gave the autonomies powers that it should not
The Constitutional Court will study in the plenary session that begins this Tuesday if it declares the second state of alarm illegal. Despite the fact that the president of the court, Juan José González Rivas, postponed the debate that should have begun in September in view of the internal division in the plenary session, the positions on both sides have barely changed in recent weeks and the fronts They remain in “irreconcilable positions” before the presentation that points out that the Government evaded parliamentary control and gave the autonomies powers that it should not have.
At this point, sources close to the court explain, González Rivas nor his closest environment are called to deceive: the consensus will not only be impossible, but everything indicates that there will be anger and division as already happened last July when the court (by six votes in favor and five against) declared illegal the fundamental axis of the first state of alarm: home confinement.
The presentation of the sentence has fallen on Magistrate Antonio Narváez, of conservative affinity, as is Pedro González-Trevijano, writer of the ruling that overturned the home confinement of 2020. And Narváez’s draft does not beat around the bush. The state of alarm of the last fall, winter and spring exception (which was the one that allowed the communities to establish “à la carte” curfews, perimeter closures or limitations on social gatherings during the second, third and fourth waves) was illegal because the Government made an interpretation contrary to the spirit of the Magna Carta of Organic Law 4/1981 of the states of alarm, exception and site to evade the periodic control of Congress every fifteen days. According to Narváez, the Executive of Sánchez also violated the law by leaving the application of the state of alarm (known as “co-governance”) in the hands of the autonomies, something that Organic Law 4/1981 does not contemplate.
.