Spain’s Constitutional Tribunal is the
supreme body for interpreting the Constitution. It lies outside
the standard Judiciary and has jurisdiction throughout the
territory of Spain to exercise the competencies defined in
article 161 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Tribunal is
independent of the other constitutional organs and is subject
only to the Constitution and its Fundamental Act.
The competencies of the Tribunal are
listed in art. 161 of the Constitution and further developed in
art. 2.1 of its Fundamental Act. The list is open-ended, with an
express provision for the Tribunal to hear other matters
attributed to it by the Constitution or Fundamental Acts.
The system of jurisdictional competencies
currently attributed to the Constitutional Tribunal is as
follows:
a) Verification of the constitutionality of
legislation with the category of Parliamentary Legislation or
equivalent, whether enacted by the State or by any
of its Regions. This verification is carried out through an
appeal on the grounds of unconstitutionality or requests for
clarification of constitutionality. The first is a direct appeal
brought in the abstract by the Prime Minister, the Ombudsman,
fifty Deputies or Senators, or by the Governments and
Parliaments of the Regions. These appeals are heard by the
Plenary and by the two Divisions of the Tribunal.
b) Appeal for protection on the grounds of a
breach of the rights and freedoms referred to in art. 53.2 of
the Constitution.
In the first instance, the powers to guarantee the
constitutional rights and freedoms of individuals are entrusted
to the Courts and Judges included within the Judiciary, through
the routes and appeals provided by the Rules of Procedure;
nonetheless, the Constitution has established a specific and
definitive system for the protection of such rights, known as an
appeal for constitutional protection, which is handled by the
Constitutional Tribunal. In this way, the Tribunal is
established as the supreme jurisdictional body with regard to
constitutional guarantees and, therefore, the ultimate guarantor
of the fundamental rights and freedoms acknowledged in the
Constitution. Such appeals are, in principle, heard by the
Divisions, which may defer them to their Sections. The Plenary
hears those submitted to it by the Divisions in the event of a
change of doctrine and those expressly selected by it.
c) Constitutional conflicts. These may arise between the State and
one or more Regions or between a Region and one or more other
Regions, and also between the constitutional organs of the
State. Disputes involving the regions may be positive or
negative: the first deal with legislative instruments without
the category of a law that express a dispute between the
National Government and the Regional Executives regarding the
distribution of competencies between the State and the Regions
pursuant to the constitution and their respective Statutes and
they may be brought by either the State or the Regional
Governments. In the case of negative conflicts, the Tribunal
resolves on which body is responsible for a competency with
respect to which none of the parties involved deems itself
competent, and they may be brought by individuals or by the
National Government. Disputes between constitutional organs may
lead to confrontations between the National Government, the
Chamber of Deputies, the Senate and the General Council of the
Judiciary, thus requiring the definition of their respective
powers. Furthermore, the Tribunal hears all challenges brought
pursuant to article 161.2 of the Constitution. All these
proceedings are heard by the Plenary, which has the power,
except in the case of conflicts between constitutional organs,
to defer their resolution to the Divisions.
d) Conflicts in defence of local autonomy: These are brought by municipalities and
provinces with respect to Acts of Parliament or other
legislation with the status of laws, whether enacted by the
State or the Regions, considered to impair the autonomy of local
governments guaranteed under the constitution. Their resolution
corresponds to the Plenary, unless deferred by it to one of the
Divisions.
e) Prior verification of the constitutionality of
international treaties: At the request of the Government or
either of the Houses of Parliament, this procedure attempts to
avoid the inclusion on Spain’s statute books of international
legislation that runs counter to the Constitution. Two cases
have arisen in which this mechanism was used by the Tribunal. In
the first, Declaration 1/1992 concluded that Spain could only
subscribe the Maastricht Treaty if it first amended art. 13.2 of
the Constitution, as was done in August, 1992. In the second
case, Declaration 1/2004 stated that it was not necessary to
amend the Constitution to incorporate into Spanish law the
so-called European Union Constitutional Treaty. This
verification process it the sole responsibility of the Plenary.
f) Revocations in defence of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction: At the initiative of the
Tribunal against any act or resolution impairing its
jurisdiction. Heard by the Plenary.