The Constitutional Court has accepted on Tuesday the request of former Minister and current magistrate Juan Carlos Campo to abstain from all deliberations on the amnesty law, according to sources from the court. The decision was made by a narrow margin of 6 votes in favor and 5 against, after an intense debate, indicating a tough discussion ahead in October regarding the cross-recusals of several magistrates. The same decision to remove Campo from matters related to amnesty was made by the Constitutional Court just two weeks ago unanimously, but this time the court was divided. Conservative magistrates argued a procedural issue, requesting that three other magistrates whose recusals will be debated later should not be present in the vote. However, the progressive block refused this. The full session on the 11th addressed Campo’s abstention in debates on the constitutionality issue raised by the Supreme Court against the amnesty law. Now, it has been agreed to also remove the former minister from the 16 constitutional challenges filed by parliaments and autonomous communities, as well as the PP, and the remaining three constitutionality issues from the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC). Campo, who was Minister of Justice in Pedro Sanchez’s government openly opposed a hypothetical amnesty law in 2021, calling it “clearly unconstitutional”.
Following the decision on Campo’s abstention, the Constitutional Court will have to discuss in October the recusals filed against three other magistrates of the court: the president, Cándido Conde-Pumpido, and magistrate Laura Díez (both from the progressive sector) and magistrate José María Macías (from the conservative sector). The PP has recused the first two, while the Prosecutor’s Office, the State Attorney, and former Catalan president Carles Puigdemont have recused the third. Conservative magistrates Enrique Arnaldo, José María Macías, and Concepción Espejel have announced they will file a dissenting opinion, according to court sources. The deliberation on the amnesty law has been preceded by a flurry of cross-recusals. The conservative sector has argued that all recused magistrates should be excluded from the debate, leaving the court tied (4-4) to resolve each recusal incident, with the vice president, Inmaculada Montalbán, in the role of president acting as the tie-breaker. The progressive block argues that the recused magistrate should only abstain from their own vote but participate in those affecting their colleagues. Sources from this sector claim that conservative magistrates are only seeking to reject the recusal of José María Macías.
The situation at the Constitutional Court reflects a deep divide among magistrates, with differing views on recusal procedures and the handling of sensitive cases such as the amnesty law. The decision to remove Campo from discussions on amnesty highlights the complex nature of the legal debate surrounding this issue, with strong opinions on both sides. The upcoming discussions on the recusals of other magistrates indicate further challenges ahead for the court, as it navigates the intricacies of internal disputes and external pressures. The arguments put forward by both the conservative and progressive sectors reveal the tensions within the court, as they seek to uphold their principles and navigate complex legal matters. The outcome of these discussions will have significant implications for the interpretation and application of the law, highlighting the importance of a fair and transparent judicial process. As the court continues to grapple with these challenges, the need for a clear and consistent approach to recusal procedures and decision-making processes becomes increasingly apparent, ensuring the integrity and credibility of the Constitutional Court.
