The Supreme Court cools Puigdemont's "resounding victory" and will maintain his arrest warrant despite the ECJ's endorsement

The return of Carles Puigdemont will have to wait. The Supreme Court will keep active the national arrest warrant against the former president of the Generalitat, despite the fact that the Court of Justice of the European Union declared this Thursday that the amnesty law is compatible with Community law.

The position of the High Court, conveyed by legal sources, arrived a few hours after Puigdemont proclaimed a “resounding victory” for separatism in Europe. The leader of Junts had warned that maintaining his exclusion from the amnesty would mean confronting European law. The response from the Supreme Court lowers those expectations and rules out any immediate change in his procedural situation.

The key lies in the scope of the judgment issued in Luxembourg. The CJEU has examined the preliminary questions raised by the Court of Auditors and the National High Court, related to the financial interests of the Union, terrorism offenses, and various procedural aspects of the law. The Supreme Court's refusal to amnesty the embezzlement attributed to Puigdemont was outside these consultations.

For this reason, legal sources maintain that the European ruling “says nothing” that contradicts the decision adopted by Judge Pablo Llarena. The order will remain in force while the Constitutional Court resolves the appeal for protection filed by the former president or the instructing judge himself modifies his criteria.

Embezzlement keeps the arrest warrant active

Llarena decided in July 2024 that the amnesty could not be applied to Puigdemont for the crime of embezzlement related to the organization of the referendum of October 1, 2017. Article one of the law excludes acts that have provided a personal benefit of a patrimonial nature.

The Supreme Court considers that such a benefit existed because Puigdemont and other leaders of the procés would have used public funds to finance the referendum, avoiding assuming that outlay with their own assets. The defense rejects this interpretation and maintains that the former president never enriched himself or incorporated public money into his personal assets.

This restrictive reading of embezzlement was subsequently supported by the Supreme Court's Appeals Chamber. Puigdemont then exhausted the avenue within the High Court and went to the Constitutional Court to denounce that the resolution disfigured the content of the law and violated his fundamental rights.

The sources consulted by 'EFE' now emphasize that the order was maintained due to the interpretation of Spanish law itself, regardless of the doubts that other courts had raised about its compatibility with Union Law. "That circumstance does not change with the CJEU ruling," they summarize.

The order against Puigdemont is national in scope. If he enters Spanish territory while it remains in force, he must be arrested and brought before the Supreme Court. The Luxembourg ruling does not, by itself, lead to the lifting of that measure.

Puigdemont proclaims his victory and points to Spanish Justice

Puigdemont's reaction had arrived in the morning through an extensive article published on his X account, which he headed with the phrase "Amnesty is European, repression is Spanish". The former president presented the ruling as a political triumph for Junts and for the independence movement as a whole against the powers of the State.

Puigdemont argued that the CJEU had confirmed the European validity of a law agreed upon by Junts with the PSOE to facilitate the investiture of Pedro Sánchez. He also vindicated his party's decision to reject the first text of the norm until its coverage was extended to include certain accusations of terrorism.

The leader of Junts assured that Spanish courts would violate the law and clash with European Law if they continue to reject its full application. In his writing, he also thanked his lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, for his work and reiterated that his political objective continues to be the independence of Catalonia.

Despite the triumphant tone, Puigdemont admitted that his return is still far from guaranteed. He resorted to a football metaphor to point out that the next match will be played in Spain, with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court as protagonists. His message hinted at the difficulties he still expects to encounter in the national courts.

The subsequent announcement by the Supreme Court has confirmed that caution. The European ruling reinforces the general validity of the amnesty, but does not resolve the specific interpretation that keeps Puigdemont outside its application.

What Luxembourg has really decided

The Grand Chamber of the CJEU has resolved the cases raised by the Court of Auditors and the National Court. The former asked whether the pardon of accounting liability derived from the expenses of the procés could harm the financial interests of the Union. Luxembourg has ruled out that the possible reduction of the Spanish contribution caused by a hypothetical Catalan independence allows such damage to be appreciated.

The second question concerned several defendants for terrorism linked to the Committees for the Defense of the Republic. The European court concludes that the law complies with the EU directive against terrorism, since it excludes acts that have intentionally caused serious violations of human rights.

The judges also acknowledge that the approval and application of an amnesty belongs to the area of competence of each State. The aim of reducing political and institutional tensions and advancing towards reconciliation is compatible with the European legal order, according to the court.

The CJEU introduces, however, limits in some procedural aspects. National judicial bodies must have the necessary time to study each case and may maintain precautionary measures while awaiting a European response. The obligation to resolve within a rigid period of two months cannot prevent a judge from raising a preliminary question or waiting for its resolution.

Neither of the two rulings decides whether Puigdemont obtained a patrimonial benefit from the embezzlement attributed by the Supreme Court. Luxembourg also does not directly lift arrest warrants nor apply the amnesty to specific individuals, tasks that correspond to the Spanish courts in charge of each proceeding.

Bolaños calls for completion of the application of the amnesty

The Government has received the ruling as support for its strategy to normalize the political situation in Catalonia. The Minister of the Presidency and Justice, Félix Bolaños, declared from La Moncloa that “the horizon is clear for the effective application of the law”.

Bolaños recalled that hundreds of people have already benefited from the measure and placed the cases of Puigdemont, Oriol Junqueras, and other pro-independence leaders as the last stage of the process. The minister called for this phase to be completed “as soon as possible”, although he avoided expressly addressing the Supreme Court.

The reaction from the High Court has cooled that request. Legal sources reject that the European ruling obliges Llarena to withdraw the order, because the questions answered by the CJEU did not address Puigdemont's exclusion for patrimonial benefit.

Junts has also demanded immediate movements. Its general secretary, Jordi Turull, called the ruling a "great victory" and demanded that the Constitutional Court rule before the judicial holidays. At the same time, he acknowledged that the European ruling does not yet allow Puigdemont's return to Spain.

Gonzalo Boye maintained that the legal debate on the European compatibility of the amnesty has been closed. From ERC, Oriol Junqueras spoke of an "incomplete victory" while the disqualifications and arrest warrants affecting the main leaders of the procés continue.

The Constitutional Court will have the next word

Puigdemont's appeal for protection remains pending in the Constitutional Court. The former president requests that the Supreme Court's decision be annulled and that the amnesty be applied to him, while the court of guarantees must determine whether the interpretation made regarding the patrimonial benefit respected his fundamental rights and the meaning of the norm approved by the Cortes.

The Constitutional Court already rejected in January, unanimously, to provisionally lift the arrest warrant. The magistrates considered that doing so before resolving the merits would mean anticipating their decision and affecting the criminal process opened in the Supreme Court.

The court will now have to carefully study the Luxembourg judgments before resolving the appeal. Forecasts place this deliberation between September and October, as the last plenary session of the current judicial year has its agenda closed.

Until the Constitutional Court issues a ruling or Pablo Llarena changes his decision, Puigdemont will remain under a national arrest warrant and will be arrested if he re-enters Spain.