In recent times, the Constitutional Court has submitted an increasing number of emparo appeals that question the actions of the governing bodies of the various parliaments, among which are referred to the Madrid Assembly. In addition to the challenge resolved in favor of Mass Madrid this month because of its exclusion from the Chamber’s table in the previous legislature, there are others that affect the land law and legislation on Telemadrid. The common denominator in all of them is the opposition’s condemnation for the way the assembly proceeded in the organization and its threads for legislative processing that are reminiscent of the practices of the parliamentary roller.
The cases in the above legal texts have aroused particular interest in the Constitutional Court, which has accepted them for processing precisely because it considers that they raise a very important debate. And not because of the content of its articles, but, above all, because of the method of parliamentary management of the initiative, known as the Single Reading Process. As had previously been the case with land law reform, the Constitutional Court this week appealed to Parliamentary Emporo on Telemadrid’s appeal submitted by the socialist group, understanding that the challenge addresses a very sensitive matter regarding the rights of deputation. touches. To do your job, call Juice in the office.
In short, this resource can study not only the specific decision of the table that has been appealed “to transmit the project through a processing route that allows its rapid approval—but also the rules of the Assembly’s rules.” Which opens up the possibility of leading the debate by the said single reading process. The appellants retain, in this sense, their right to political participation recognized in Article 23.1 of the Constitution, and the right to exercise the parliamentary function of deputies provided for in Article 23.2, in the case of the reform of Telemadrid. And this “because the decision of the Board of the Assembly on the Processing of the Resolution of Law 1/2021 of the Amendment of Law 8/2015 of 28 December of the Radio Television of Madrid, deprives the appellants from the procedure of a single reading of the legislative procedure to amend their right.”
Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that this resource may prompt the Constitutional Court to raise the issue of unconstitutionality. The name refers to the initiatives that the court may take if, during the resolution process of a certain case, it encounters a criterion dubiously adjusted in the Constitution. When this finding is up to a general judicial body, it must paralyze its action and request the Court of Guaranty to clarify whether the potentially pathological rule should be expelled from the legal system. , so that it stops contaminating it.
The one who impresses the most is the closest. In order not to miss anything, subscribe.
However, when it is the Constitutional Court that finds itself in such a position, one speaks of the self-questioning of unconstitutionality, as this question is raised by the Magistrate himself. In such cases, before deciding on the application of a rule or set of rules to a specific case, the court should examine whether the problem lies in its content, as it unreasonably empowers it to act in a way that It means violating the constitution. In the colloquial expression of one constitutionalist, “sometimes the problem is not with the egg, but with the frying pan.”
In the case of land law, for example, a single reading procedure was approved on the basis of Article 167 of the Regulations of the Madrid Assembly, which gives the Chamber Table the right to choose the said passage, according to the Board of Spokespersons. When the nature of a Bill or the preamble of law advises it or the ease of its making permits it”. But the appeal that raises is precisely that it is not appropriate to apply this rule as the land law is a complex matter and, therefore, there are no reasons which motivate the absence of amendments due to the urgency, necessity or simplicity of the project. ,
On the other hand, from the PP, it is argued that the PSOE has never questioned the regulation, which considers the process of a single reading, since its first draft. And he also points out that this passage can be applied to initiatives of great importance such as the partial reform of the Constitution in Cortes. The allegations made by the Board of the Legislative Assembly when the land law was appealed were emphasized that “therefore, the mere circumstance of dealing with an urban matter, In fact The complex in the opinion of the appellants, nor does it have implications for different areas, precludes the possibility of following a single reading procedure.”
Saving all the distances that are clearly visible in the constitutional media, resorting to this route of express management of the above legislative processes has evoked the memory of other delicate matters experienced in court, such as the repeal of a statutory law and the fundamental transience of the Catalan Republic. Obviously, the case is very different, but there are similarities in terms of the procedure chosen and the complaints that arise out of it. In the case of the Parliament of Catalonia, the PP, CS and PSC filed an appeal, and the Constitutional Court granted them protection. Also in that case it was questioned that the said process violated the rights of the members of an autonomous parliament for participation and political representation.
In the case of the Legislative Assembly of Madrid, the opposition’s concern is due to the fact that it believes that the tendency to convert the legislative passage of a single reading into a pattern of conduct is becoming stronger, not an exception. During the two legislatures of Isabel Diaz Ayusso as president of the community, it has been the process of processing various laws, including legislation for the abolition of own taxes, amendment of personal income tax for the regional section, creation of Creation of the University of International Business and UDIT University. The concern that exists in the opposition is that the practice is spreading, resulting in a reduction in the ability to intervene and move amendments, a way of devaluing parliamentary work and not only the right of deputies to political participation, Rather the citizens themselves through their representatives.
Another law on target
Although there is less than a year left for the legislature to expire, it is likely that three issues related to the Madrid Assembly that the Constitutional Court has had to rule since 2019, when Isabel Diaz Ayusso first came to power, will not The last. Thus, the opposition had already announced this Thursday that it would take it to the court of guarantee. universal law, With which the PP government intends to achieve forty legal changes in one vote.
“This law is a steamroller against the public safety apparatus in the region,” criticized Podemos spokesman Alejandra Jacinto during the control session. “Don’t get your hopes up too high,” he warned. “They’re not going to go ahead with the law much” monopoly, no matter how rigged the dice is. I declare in advance that the next box of law will be the Constitutional Court.”
In addition, the PP has promoted a second reform of the Telemadrid law in eight months by the same process that has already prompted the constitutionalist to take an interest in the first, following a resource from the PSOE: single reading. An election that reopens the possibility of an appeal by the opposition if a legal change is approved, which requires Vox’s support to the conservative formation.
subscribe here For our daily newsletter about Madrid.
Exclusive content for customers
read without limits