The leaders of the process for whom the amnesty was approved are still unable to benefit from the law a year and a half after its entry into force. Of all of them, the leader of Junts, Carles Puigdemont, is the one who suffers the most visible consequences: he has remained in Belgium since 2017 and still has a prison order in force if he sets foot in Spain. The former president hopes that 2026 will be the year in which his amnesty is definitively lifted, although the Supreme Court has already shown its refusal to apply it.
Pending the response that may come from Plaza Villa de ParĂs in Madrid, headquarters of the Supreme Court, the resolution of the amnesty depends first of all on the Constitutional Court. The magistrates of the body chaired by Cándido Conde-Pumpido have to resolve, foreseeably during the first half of 2026, the former president’s appeal against the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant him amnesty.
Although the court of guarantees has already endorsed the amnesty law in general, until the Constitutional Court rules on the specific case of the former president and corrects the Supreme Court, Puigdemont will not be able to return without risk of being arrested.
It will be the first time that the Constitutional Court rules on the Supreme Court’s refusal to amnesty embezzlement. In the drafts on the resources of some autonomous communities against the norm, references that could be interpreted as a preview of the debate on Puigdemont’s situation were eliminated.
As in almost everything related to the process, the action takes place on several levels (or courts, in this case). There is another relevant ruling on the amnesty that must also be issued in the early stages of 2026. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will decide whether the rule complies with European legality. It will do so based on the questions sent by the Court of Accounts in the case of the diversion of funds from the process (in which Puigdemont and around thirty sovereign leaders are accused) and the National Court in the CDR case.
A forceful response from the CJEU, in line with the conclusions of the Advocate General that supported the bulk of the amnesty law, would leave the Spanish courts that doubted the rule without room for maneuver. Although reluctantly, they would be forced to apply it.
On paper, a ruling from Luxembourg that fully supported the amnesty would prevent any possible maneuver by the Supreme Court once the Constitutional Court ruled on Puigdemont’s case, since the CJEU regulations prevent issuing a new ruling regarding what is already clear or a prejudicial question that has already been clarified (such as could be the case of embezzlement).
The Supreme Court’s open refusal to apply the law to Puigdemont despite the fact that he was the main beneficiary of it means that Junts are prepared for any scenario. The High Court considered the embezzlement not amnestiable (with an argument that sparked criticism even in the process court itself) because, in its opinion, since Puigdemont and the Government did not spend the money for the polls out of their own pockets, they had enriched themselves.
On the contrary, in line with the spirit and wording of the law, other judges in Barcelona have granted amnesty to the officials of the Puigdemont Government also accused of embezzlement for the same expenses that the Supreme Court refused to forgive.
After a year and a half in force, the law has fulfilled its objective of widespread erasure of criminal cases derived from the process, with the notable exception of its leaders prosecuted in the Supreme Court. This 2026 the Constitutional Court will also resolve the appeals to amnesty other first swords such as the president of ERC, Oriol Junqueras, or the general secretary of Junts, Jordi Turull, as well as the other two former councilors who remain abroad, Toni ComĂn and LluĂs Puig.
With these precedents, Puigdemont’s party does not rule out another movement by the Supreme Court to not apply the amnesty to the former president even if the Constitutional Court so indicates. An eventual surrender to Spain considered impossible after the resounding failures received from different European courts, the fear is that the Supreme Court will cause Puigdemont to be stranded in Belgium, that is, without a new extradition request but under the threat of jail if he crosses the Pyrenees.
The political evolution during these seven years has also moved the focus of foreign action towards domestic policy. The seven deputies in the Junts Congress, essential for Pedro Sánchez to support his investiture, have returned Puigdemont’s party to a centrality from which it had moved. Despite its loss of institutional weight, Junts has recovered the business dialogue lost with the process.
In parallel with the court decisions, Puigdemont will have to redefine relations with the PSOE in 2026 after a turbulent 2025. Over the course of last year, Junts went from tentatively breaking with the Socialists to making the divorce official, although in the final stages of the year Pedro Sánchez has tried to mend relations by resuming pending commitments and giving in on matters where Junts is going to the right in the face of competition from Aliança Catalana, such as multiple recidivism.
Aware that effective compliance with the law may be one of the few refuges to weather the storm of what remains of the legislature in Spain, it is the socialists who have placed the most hope in 2026 being the year of amnesty.
In the last plenary session of the year, the president of the Generalitat, Salvador Illa, to whom Puigdemont’s supporters are fiercely opposed in Parliament, was “sure” that the law will be fully “effective” in 2026, and that this will represent “a very important step forward for everyone.” And he extended his hand to the newly appointed president of the Junts group, Mònica Sales, to whom he said that he “agrees” with her on the matter of the criminal forgetting of the process. It remains to be seen if the president’s wishes come true with the new year.
Source: www.eldiario.es
