The EU Court of Justice has given the green light to Spain's amnesty law this Thursday, but Carles Puigdemont will not return home immediately. The Luxembourg ruling does not order his return, although it will significantly clear the way for the Constitutional Court, which must rule on the appeals filed by the fugitive and those convicted of embezzlement in the 'procés'.

European backing that facilitates the Constitutional Court's work

Cándido Conde-Pumpido, president of the Constitutional Court, now knows that the amnesty has the support of European justice. Furthermore, the CJEU has acknowledged in its reasoning that the Constitutional Court itself already declared the law constitutional last year. This is an important point of support for the Spanish judges who must decide whether the amnesty applies to the concrete pending cases.

According to abc.es, the ruling responds to two preliminary questions raised in Luxembourg: one by the Spanish Court of Accounts following complaints from Catalan Civil Society and the Public Prosecutor's Office, and another by the National Court in relation to those accused of terrorism in CDR cases.

Public funds are not EU money

The Luxembourg Court has ruled that the amnesty law does not breach Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which protects EU financial interests. The reasoning is clear: the public funds spent on the illegal referendum and independence actions did not come from the European budget nor were they destined for it.

The court also rejected the argument that a hypothetical Catalan independence would reduce Spain's contribution to the EU. For the European judges, such a scenario does not constitute a real impact on the Union's financial interests. This was precisely one of the arguments on which the Supreme Court relied to deny the application of amnesty to the embezzlement offence.

Terrorism and human rights guarantees

Regarding the CDR case, the CJEU has endorsed that the European directive against terrorism does not prohibit member states from applying amnesties to pacify major political or social conflicts. However, it has made clear that the exclusion of terrorist acts involving serious human rights violations remains valid.

The Luxembourg court has also clarified that it is solely the responsibility of the competent judicial bodies to interpret the law case by case, determining whether each specific offence falls within the exclusions marked by the amnesty.

What remains outside the European ruling

The CJEU has declared inadmissible the National Court's question on whether the amnesty endangers Spain's territorial integrity or the free movement of citizens. The European judges considered that question to be hypothetical and unrelated to the object of the concrete criminal proceedings.

It has also upheld that the two-month deadline set by the law to extinguish liability is not contrary to the effective judicial protection required by EU law.

What happens now?

The ball is now in the Constitutional Court's court and, probably afterwards, in the Supreme Court. The next step will be for Conde-Pumpido and his colleagues to rule on the pending appeals. European justice has already closed the door to the financial and terrorist arguments that were blocking the amnesty; now it is up to Spanish justice to decide whether there was personal benefit in the concrete offences, the last filter that the law keeps open.