The reports prepared by the lawyers of the Constitutional Court (TC) to determine whether the autonomous communities are entitled to appeal the amnesty law conclude that they are, thus clearing the way for the challenges presented by the regions governed by the PP and the socialist Government of Emiliano García Page in Castilla-La Mancha, according to legal sources. Europa Press.
The president of the TC, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, commissioned a group of four lawyers from the court of guarantees to prepare a study on the legitimacy of the autonomous communities to challenge the amnesty, with the aim of This issue will be resolved generally for the 15 resources of unconstitutionality presented by governments and regional assemblies.
LEGITIMATION
This report, to which you have had access The aforementioned agency has spoken out in favor of the legitimation of the territories, same conclusion reached by the lawyer assigned to Laura Díezthe magistrate reporting the first unconstitutionality appeal presented by an autonomous community – that of the Cortes of Aragon -, in her own report, the one that is usually issued, according to the sources consulted.
The report commissioned by Conde-Pumpido explains that “the concept of legitimation is one of the most debated and discussed in procedural doctrine”
With these two reports, the Plenary will decide next week on the admissibility of the appeal signed by the Cortes of Aragon. Sources from the court of guarantees advance that the magistrates will admit it for processing, thus marking the way for the other 14 appeals presented by the autonomous communities. Previously, the magistrates have accepted for processing the question of unconstitutionality presented by the Supreme Court (TS) and the appeal signed by deputies and senators of the Popular Party.
In total, Four issues were presented against the amnesty -that of the TS and three of the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC)- and 16 appeals: the one registered by the PP, that of Castilla-La Mancha and those of Cantabria, Madrid, Galicia, Murcia, Andalusia, Valencia, Castilla and León, La Rioja, Extremadura and the Balearic Islands.
FLEXIBLE INTERPRETATION
The report commissioned by Conde-Pumpido explains that “the concept of legitimation is one of the most debated and discussed in procedural doctrine, having stated the difficulty of developing a general theory of legitimation, since it would be about the theory in a process.” general’ (archetypal, one might say) non-existent, and therefore the scholar must limit himself to the most modest task of elaborating that of each of the jurisdictional orders.
It therefore focuses on constitutional processes, where it is based on the doctrinal premise that The TC “cannot and should not accept procedural legitimations that do not come directly from the Constitution”. And remember that in its article 162 it establishes “taxatively” who can file unconstitutionality and amparo appeals, while for other constitutional processes it refers to the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court (LOTC).
UNCONSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES
The lawyers specify that article 162.1.a) of the Constitution establishes that “the President of the Government, the Ombudsman, 50 deputies, 50 senators, the collegiate executive bodies of the autonomous communities and, where appropriate, their assemblies”.
However, they clarify that “this constitutional provision has been specified in article 32 of the LOTC, a provision whose section 2 has specified that the active legitimation of the collegiate executive bodies of the autonomous communities and their legislative assemblies is exclusively for file an appeal for unconstitutionality against the lawsprovisions or acts with the force of law of the State that may affect its own sphere of autonomy”.
RESTRICTIVE
For the four lawyers, this limitation contemplated in the LOTC “cannot be interpreted restrictively, but rather in favor of the recognition of the legitimation“. Thus, they understand that it is not a question of denouncing the violation of a regional competence, nor of defending it, but of there being “a point of material connection between state law and the autonomous sphere of competence.”
“In this way, the executives and parliaments of the autonomous communities are entitled to file an appeal for unconstitutionality against state laws in all cases in which there is a minimal connection with the activity of the autonomous community,” they indicate.
INSTITUTIONAL DEFENSE
The report points out that “the requirement that the law affect the scope of autonomy itself” has also been interpreted flexibly. “It is not identified with the defense of one’s own powers, but rather has a broader and more coherent scope of institutional defense with the very nature of the unconstitutionality appeal, which is not intended to claim jurisdiction, but rather to purge the legal system of unconstitutional norms,” he clarifies.
Thus, it maintains that “the legitimization of the governments and parliaments of the autonomous communities to file an appeal for unconstitutionality against state laws is not so much for the preservation or delimitation of the sphere of competence itself, as for the objective purification of the system through the invalidation of the unconstitutional norm“. Specifically, it highlights that “the Constitutional Court has recognized legitimation of the autonomous communities in those cases in which the connection point is constituted by regulations that affect the constitutional architecture of the State, that is, the constitutionally provided institutional framework and the system of principles and values that are inherent to it”.
ACCOUNTING RESPONSIBILITY
In the opinion of the signatory lawyers, “it is clear that the measures that have been adopted affect and involve all the autonomous communities, so it is inexcusable to link the previous connection points of a material nature with the content of the law itself with the purpose of recognize their legitimacy to challenge Organic Law 1/2024” of amnesty.
To this they add that the unconstitutionality appeals allege that, “by establishing the exemption from accounting responsibility through Organic Law 1/2024, the state legislator would be attributing the competence to dispose of credits or funds of autonomous ownership, violating with their financial autonomy”, which they consider that “there is an interest in defending their own sphere of autonomy”.
#Constitutional #lawyers #conclude #Autonomous #Communities #entitled #appeal #amnesty #law