PSOE-Junts pact is under harsh criticism in Spain: law firms and organizations reject the use of the term "lawfare" and ask politicians to respect democracy

Marina Vanni

The agreement between the Socialist Party and Junts Per Catalunya for the investiture of Pedro Sánchez as president of the Spanish Government caused great discontent in the legal sector.

The Madrid Bar Association (ICAM) repudiated the agreement suggesting there is a judicialization of the political life in the country, in reference to the 2017 Catalan referendum and its ramifications, and that parliamentary commissions could be established to investigate alleged irregularities in the Judiciary.

The entity expressed on its official website that "the conformation of parliamentary majorities must always be subject to the principle of constitutional legality", adding that "the use of the term lawfare (instrumentalization of justice for political purposes) referred to the Courts and Tribunals has no place in a Democratic State".

This statement was followed by that of the Granada Bar Association (ICAG), which remarked: "its deep concern for the content of the aforementioned document and its possible legal application since it represents a frontal attack on the Rule of Law in its most elementary foundations".

In the Spanish capital, the Attorney Association stated that the agreement between socialism and Catalan separatism "includes elements of accentuated seriousness for legal certainty and the principle of legality" and the use of the word lawfare "can only be a form of control".

Pérez-Llorca was one of the first law firms to speak out against the text and adhere to the words of the ICAM, stressing on LinkedIn that "Spanish judges and magistrates exercise their function in accordance with the law, with independence and professionalism".

Along the same lines, Garrigues defended "the separation of powers as a basic element of the rule of law" and stressed its "disagreement with any interference, from any political or ideological position, in the activities of judges and magistrates who, in the exercise of their functions, are subject only to the rule of law.

Uría Menéndez shared a brief statement endorsing ICAM’s text and highlighting "the important work that, with independence and subject only to the rule of law, our judges and courts have been carrying out".

Ontier, for its part, highlighted "its rejection of the attacks against the pillars of our Rule of Law included in the investiture agreements, such as the granting of amnesty to persons convicted of serious crimes committed in 2017 or the creation of parliamentary commissions of inquiry to audit jurisdictional actions, which is an attack on judicial independence and the principle of separation of powers. We thus adhere to the institutional Declaration of the Governing Board of the ICAM."

Broseta remarked "his disagreement with any intervention in the activity of judges and magistrates" and added that "many people put their freedom and their lives at risk" to consolidate a democratic Spain.

In turn, the Professional Association of the Judiciary warned that an eventual creation of investigative commissions could "subject judicial procedures and decisions to parliamentary review, with evident interference in judicial independence and a breach of the separation of powers".

Meanwhile, the Bar Association of Barcelona (ICAB) avoided taking sides on the situation and said in an official statement last Friday that "it is not included among the functions of this association to issue public positions on facts or news of a political nature.

As of this Monday, November 13, the General Council of the Spanish Bar (CGAE), led by Victoria Ortega, has not shared its position on the issue.

Author: Marina Vanni