Two of the eight members of the Constitutional Court who rejected last Tuesday the challenge of the president, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, in the PP’s appeal against the amnesty law, consider that this decision was taken by a poorly constituted college of magistrates.
Concepción Espejel and Enrique Arnaldo also warn that the appearance of impartiality is “seriously damaged” —said the first— And “the rules” for the formation of the TC are modified without justification —declares the second— decide “no more and no less than the composition of the plenary” called to decide on the amnesty law.
The TC refused to withdraw its president, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, from the appeal resolution that the Popular Party presented on this controversial law.
He did it with a composition of eight magistrates decided by Condé-Pumpido himself through internal communication. He indicated that “they will not intervene in the deliberation of the said matter [su recusación por el PP] the challenged magistrates Conde-Pumpido, Díez Bueso and Macías Castaño nor the abstained magistrate Campo Moreno”.
Cándido Conde-Pumpido, Laura Díez and Juan Carlos Campo were contested by the PP, even though the latter had previously abstained. Macías, however, was challenged in the PP’s appeal —not yet admitted to treatment— by the floor.
“The challenge made by someone who was not a party to the process should have been rejected downright premature, without prejudice to the fact that it can be raised once the appeal is admitted, if necessary, and the State’s lawyer presents itself legally in said procedure”, indicates the dissenting vote of Concepción Espejel concerning the challenge of Macías.
In your opinion, last Tuesday”There was no reason to exclude Macías from the college of magistrates —which in turn also corresponds to the presentation of this constitutional process— based on a challenge from someone who is not a party to the process.
For Espejel, the exclusion of the four challenged magistrates from Tuesday’s deliberations “could have been justified only if the four challenges had been resolved in the same resolution, one of them due to a sudden loss of meaning due to the ‘approval of the abstention of Campo, who did not admit because Macías was inappropriate and resolved in the same resolution those raised in the declaration regarding the president and Díez.
The critical judge “no explanation was given as to why the same criterion was not followed” adopted in up to 23 resolutions, which he cites, in which the TC jointly resolved challenges when they concerned several magistrates.
Some of these precedents are “very close chronologically” and occurred “under the current presidency of the court, while in the present case the president accepted that the challenges related to the amnesty law processes be resolved in stages” .
Arnaldo highlights the president’s agreement to resolve the challenges separately, decision he describes as “extravagant”.
“With the way of resolving the challenges, the striking result will be that two challenged judges (Cándido Conde-Pumpido and Laura Díez) will be able to intervene in the decision of the challenge that affects Judge José María Macías, while he was excluded from “to intervene in the decision to recusal the president and it is predictable that it will be the same in that which affects judge Laura Díez”, he underlines.
“I can only conclude by warning that the manner chosen by this Court to resolve the challenges filed in this case, of capital political and social importance, as we know, may generate in public opinion an undesirable perception that , By deviating from precedent and resolving challenges asymmetrically, the rules are changed without justification this must govern the decision neither more nor less than on the composition of the Plenary called to resolve the appeals and questions of unconstitutionality concerning a law whose debate and approval have been the protagonist and at the same time polarized Spanish society since more than a year,” he concludes.
