Spain's Supreme Court has for the first time amnestied the members of the Parliament Mesa who in 2019 defied the Constitutional Court by allowing the Chamber to vote on self-determination, closing one of the deepest wounds of Catalonia's independence process.

Four deputies freed from conviction following Constitutional Court approval

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division has declared amnestied the four members of the Parliament Mesa who were tried for allowing a vote on the censure of the monarchy and self-determination in October 2019. Among them was Roger Torrent, then president of the Mesa and former ERC member. The other three are Josep Costa i Rosellló, Eusebi Campdepadrós i Pucurull and Adriana Delgado.

The ruling comes after the Constitutional Court approved the Amnesty Law in June 2025 with six votes in favour from the progressive majority against four from the conservative minority. According to eldiario.es, this is the first practical application of the amnesty rule by the High Court in the context of the independence process.

Eight people amnestied for disobedience and public disorder

In total, the Supreme Court extends amnesty to eight people convicted of disobedience or public disorder offences linked to Catalan independence. Along with the Parliament Mesa deputies, others are affected, such as Maties Secarrant, former mayor of Sabadell, who had been sentenced to a fine and disqualification for allowing municipal facilities to be used to vote in the 1 October referendum.

People prosecuted for their participation in street clashes following the sentence condemning the independence leaders in October 2019 are also amnestied. The court considers that, although these events occurred after the self-determination process, they fit within the scope of the Amnesty Law promoted by Pedro Sánchez's Government.

An earlier acquittal that generates legal tensions

The four Parliament Mesa deputies had already been acquitted in the first instance by Catalonia's High Court of Justice, which considered that the resolutions on monarchy and self-determination were "mere political statements" without intention to "materialise" independence. However, the Supreme Court appealed that sentence in cassation.

Now, amnesty closes the proceedings through another route, without needing to address the merits of the original case. The Division rules that "its potential criminal liability is declared extinguished as a consequence thereof".

A first step with much politics still to come

This Supreme Court decision places amnesty on the grounds of real execution, beyond theoretical rulings. However, more significant issues remain pending: the Constitutional Court will rule on 22 September on the first appeals filed against the Supreme Court for not having applied amnesty to other independence process leaders.

Amnesty remains a political battleground. While the Government sees it as key to "normalising coexistence", the conservative opposition views it as an act of impunity. The Supreme Court, step by step, applies it to specific cases, but the most controversial decisions are yet to come.