Spain’s two major parties have reached a preliminary agreement that could end the five-year stalemate in renewing appointments to the country’s judiciary. The four-point deal would start by having the European Commission serve as an observer for the process of appointing new members of the General Council (the administrative arm of Spain’s judicial system, which holds judges accountable and appoints magistrates).
Previous failures to settle the question have debilitated the process of justice in Spain and alarmed the European Commission. The controversy centers on renewing the General Council, comprising 20 members, 12 judges, and eight other legal experts.Under Spanish law, this membership should be completely renewed every five years by the parliament. Each appointment requires a three-fifths majority approval in both the Congress of Deputies and the Senate, forcing the two major parties to reach an agreement.
The idea to bring in the European Commission came from the center-right Partido Popular (PP), which hopes that Commission oversight can ensure that appointees are politically and judicially neutral. Cross-party agreement between the PP and the ruling Partido Socialist Obrero Español (PSOE) would also change the appointment process for the General Council, so that the country’s judges appoint the General Council members. The EU had also recommended that Spain make this change, as it is considered the gold standard for judicial independence and would avoid future political stalemates.
While the current political stalemate has hindered the functioning of the judiciary, the political responses to date would serve to further distance the legal system from the will of the electorate.
How did the deadlock take shape? Until 2018, the ruling socialists and the PP confirmed these appointments with relative ease. That changed in 2018, when PSOE president Pedro Sánchez assumed his first mandate as prime minister, leaning on the country’s nationalist-separatist elements for support. Under his executive leadership, no such agreement was made, despite General Council’s mandate expiring in 2018. Each party accuses the other of refusing to compromise. On the most pressing practical question—the appointment of new judges, normally carried out by the General Council—Sánchez agreed to reverse his earlier judicial reform to allow the General Council to resume its function of appointing judges.
In a country where the judiciary has long leaned conservative, the current government is supported by Basque and Catalan independence parties who need judicial support for their respective causes, increasing the polarization of Spanish politics. While the Constitutional Court has served as a retention wall against a Spanish national breakup, this role is no longer guaranteed.
Historically, Spanish law allowed the General Council to continue functioning should politicians allow it to outlive its mandate. But in March 2021, the socialist-led government passed a law prohibiting the General Council from appointing judges after its mandate had expired. The subsequent loss of functional power is being felt in the country’s courts, many of which are now barely able to operate after judges retire or their appointments expire. This included one of the country’s highest courts, the Constitutional Court.
Following elections in July 2023, Sánchez and the PSOE returned to office on a slim parliamentary majority dependent on Catalan and Basque secessionist votes. Sánchez finally sat down with PP president Alberto Nuñez Feijóo earlier this week to discuss the legal gridlock facing new General Council appointments. The two emerged from the meeting with a preliminary agreement to replenish Spain’s judicial bodies with personnel and ultimately change the format of judicial appointments by removing them completely from the hands of politicians.
