Today, the European Justice has leaned for the first time in favor of Carles Puigdemont’s thesis regarding the initial refusal of the European Parliament to assign him a seat immediately after the May 2019 elections, a controversial decision that at the time was endorsed by the General Court of the European Union and that the former president appealed. Puigdemont could score a late but important moral victory in the coming months because, according to the EU lawyer general, he should have been able to take his seat on July 1, 2019, at the beginning of the legislature, and not only in December. of that same year.
The conclusions of the advocate general, published today in Luxembourg, take a stand against the opinion issued by the General Court of the EU in July 2022 and propose the annulment of the ruling that considered the refusal of the then president of the European Parliament to be in accordance with European law. Antonio Tajani, member of the European People’s Party, to recognize both the former president and Toni Comín as MEPs and assign them a seat in the institution. The opinion of the advocate general is not binding but guides the final ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and in three out of four cases they agree.
The IX legislature of the European Parliament is about to end but the matter remains relevant to clarify not only the legal situation of Puigdemont and Comín but, in general, what conditions must be met for an elected politician to access a seat in the institution. Although both Puigdemont and Comín were on the list of elected deputies published by the Central Electoral Board (JEC) after the European elections in May 2019, they did not appear on the final list sent to Brussels for not having complied with the requirement established in the legislation. Spanish to swear by the Constitution due to the risk of being arrested if they traveled to Spain to complete that procedure. Tajani based his decision not to recognize them as MEPs on that point and, until now, European justice had supported him. His successor, the social democrat David Sassoli, would however depart from Tajani’s position and, relying on a ruling on the immunity of Oriol Junqueras, extended their MEP credentials and allowed them to take possession of their seat in December 2019.
According to the EU’s lawyer general, Maciej Szpunar, the General Court of the EU erred in its ruling on the issue by not considering that “the letter of June 27, 2019 contained the definitive decision of the president of the European Parliament to make ignoring the proclamation of June 13, 2019”. By adopting such a position, the President of the European Parliament “questioned the officially proclaimed election results, even though the Parliament was bound by the proclamation of June 13, 2019, which was the official proclamation of the results,” Szpunar argues. .
“On the contrary, its president [Tajani] chose to follow the subsequent notifications from the Spanish authorities, which did not faithfully and completely reflect those results,” says the lawyer general, explains the CJEU in the press release published today. . On the other hand, he adds, with his letter of June 27, Tajani gave effect to the suspension of the prerogatives of Messrs. Puigdemont and Comín arising from their status as members of the European Parliament, in violation of Union Law. “No provision.” of this Law authorizes a Member State to suspend the prerogatives of members of the European Parliament”, concludes the Advocate General.
The ruling of the General Court of the EU declared inadmissible the appeal presented by Puigdemont and Comín against the decision of the European Parliament, alleging that it had limited itself to “taking note” of the legal situation that had been notified to it by the Central Electoral Board of Spain and already pointed out that it was not a definitive decision but, on the contrary, it could change “depending on any new information” provided by the Spanish authorities. Then, the judges concluded that the decision was the consequence of “the application of Spanish law” and not of Tajani’s refusal to assign them a seat after receiving the JEC list, in which neither Puigdemont nor Comín appeared because they had not sworn to the Constitution, as stipulated by Spanish legislation.
The judges in fact considered that the European Parliament was not competent to rule on whether national legislation and the exclusion of Puigdemont and Comín from the list notified by Spain to the institution were in accordance with European law, but the position of the advocate general is radically opposite since, Relying on the ruling on Junqueras’ immunity, it recognizes them as members of the European Parliament from the moment the results are announced, without the need to comply with any requirement derived from national law. This is what, in practice, Sassoli did six months after the elections. The paradox is that the institution itself considers that that decision was “probably illegal,” according to lawyer Norbert Lorenz, a member of the European Parliament’s legal services, during the hearing of the General Court of the EU held in November 2022 in Luxembourg on parliamentary immunity Puigdemont, Comín and Clara Ponsatí.
Sassoli’s successor, the popular Maltese Roberta Metsola, has chosen to tiptoe over the decision of the Italian social democrat, who died prematurely in the final stretch of his mandate, and has not commented on the legal situation of Puigdemont and Comín. The reports requested by his office to the JEC reiterated his position that the Junts candidates have not been officially recognized but Metsola has not spoken out and has managed to reach the end of the legislature without taking a position on the thorny legal and political debate whose resolution, In the end, it will be left in the hands of European justice.
