The opinion of the Court of Justice of the European Union
The Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union has issued a favorable opinion to the Members of the European Parliament Carles Puigdemont and Toni Comín. This opinion is not binding, but often coincides with the final decision of the court.
According to this legal opinion, the European Parliament’s initial refusal to grant them the seat for not swearing an oath to the Constitution should be reversed. It is also proposed to annul the previous judgment of the General Court of the European Union (TGUE) which supported the decision of the European Parliament.
Criticism of the previous decision
The opinion of the TJUE criticizes the lack of consideration for the case of Oriol Junqueras and his right to immunity, established in a previous ruling. This decision also questions the first refusal of the European Parliament, indicating that it should have been based on the official election results, not on the subsequent notifications of the Spanish authorities.
Context del cas
Initially, the Central Electoral Board (JEC) recognized them as elected MEPs, but they were disqualified for not swearing to the Constitution. The European Parliament’s decision to deny them the seat was based on this.
The advocate general also reminds that no member state can deprive the representatives of the European Parliament of their prerogatives. This decision does not affect the immunity of MEPs, which had already been revoked in a previous ruling.
Impact and future of the ruling
Although the opinion is not binding, it may influence future similar cases. It is relevant for situations in which MEPs elected in Spain refuse to swear to the Constitution, such as Jordi Solé of Esquerra Republicana.
