A panorama of judicial tension
August 24 marks a key moment in the Spanish political scene. The waters seem to have calmed, but the shadows of the controversy persist. On the one hand, the Supreme Court (TS) maintains an inflexible position against the application of amnesties for pro-independence supporters, without giving in to political pressure. On the other hand, Carles Puigdemont, leader of the opposition, has returned to Spanish territory, seeking to make an appearance during the investiture of 155, but has been forced to withdraw in the face of a massive police deployment.
The mechanisms of impunity
It is a good time for a deep reflection on the capacity of the TS to act with such margin. How can a court, which is supposed to be the guardian of the law, be able to challenge the rules so freely? What factors allow the TS to interpret the laws so loosely and even reject legislative decisions in a tone that might remind the Constitutional Court? The key to the puzzle lies in the lack of consequences for his actions.
The closed circle of the TS
The answer to the TS’s impunity is simple: if someone decided to file a complaint against him, the TS itself would be the one to determine whether to proceed or not. This creates a protective system that feeds back, leaving little room for accountability. The members of the TS are not strangers to the dynamics of corporatism that predominates in the judicial system.
The critical look towards justice
Poor monitoring of the crime of judicial prevarication, which involves knowingly deciding cases contrary to the law, is an example of how the culture of corporatism can prevent accountability among judges. It is common for complaints to be dismissed without prior investigation, on the grounds that they are matters of legal interpretation.
Exceptions to the rule
However, there are cases that seem to challenge this dynamic, such as the courts that have dealt with the Tsunami and Volhov cases. Their decisions have led to situations of legal debate that could be equated to those of the TS. In these cases, the pressure of the judges’ imminent retirement may have influenced their courage in issuing controversial rulings.
Proposals for judicial reform
To address this situation of immunity surrounding the TS, a legal reform could be considered that would allow complaints against the TS to be handled by a random tribunal made up of judges from other instances. This would ensure that the TS would not have the security of being judged by its own colleagues, thus enhancing more effective control over its decisions.
Uncertainty about who will judge their actions could act as a deterrent, forcing magistrates to think more carefully about their legal interpretations. The result of this reform could be a more transparent and responsible justice, where the decisions of the Supreme Court are not exempt from rigorous scrutiny.
