On Tuesday, the full Tribunal Constitucional is due to consider Cándido Conde-Pumpido's proposed ruling on amnesty for malversación linked to the Catalan procés. The judgment would establish the court's position on the disputed offence. If the court adopts it and the Supreme Court applies it, Carles Puigdemont and the other fugitive politicians could return to Spain without being detained.
The case concerns Dolors Bassa, the former Catalan minister for Labour, and is expected to become the first judgment on this issue by the full court. José María Macías, the conservative magistrate whose case previously headed the order of appeals, will not put his own draft to a vote. His proposal also effectively backed Bassa's appeal. He is expected to dissent from the position supported by the progressive majority.
EFE reported that Conde-Pumpido's draft links the disputed misappropriation to the aims of the independence process, including the October 1 referendum, as well as to the question of who ultimately received the money.
Choosing Conde-Pumpido's draft is a substantive procedural move. The majority believes the president's judgment should establish the constitutional interpretation for the remaining appeals. It does not want a proposal by a magistrate who disagrees with it to lead a case of this importance.
The dispute began when the amnesty law took effect in 2024. The Tribunal Supremo suspended its application to the offence of misappropriation of public funds, arguing that the procés leaders had personally benefited because they avoided expenses that would otherwise have come from their own pockets.
That reasoning covered politicians convicted in a final judgment and people still being prosecuted while outside Spain. The affected group includes Bassa, Jordi Turull, Oriol Junqueras and Raül Romeva. The fugitive politicians named in the proceedings are Puigdemont, Lluís Puig and Toni Comín.
The amnesty law excluded cases involving personal enrichment. It also said that using public money for activities connected with the procés, including the referendum and its promotion, should not automatically count as personal enrichment. The Constitutional Court's draft says the Supreme Court's interpretation creates a logical contradiction: under it, amnesty would be impossible for the misappropriation committed by anyone prosecuted or convicted.
Conde-Pumpido's proposal instead points to the law's preamble and stated purpose. It says the law was meant to cover public funds diverted to organise the independence referendum and related political activities, rather than money placed in the leaders' pockets. The exclusion would apply only when personal enrichment had been proven. The Tribunal Constitucional had already upheld most of the amnesty law in June 2025.
El Independiente reported that the draft goes beyond simply overturning the decision and sending the case back for reconsideration: it would direct the Supreme Court to act as a priority and urgently recognise the misappropriation as covered by the amnesty. The proposed binding effect has drawn objections from the Supreme Court's Criminal Chamber.
The timing matters. The ruling may go to the Tribunal Supremo as soon as it has been signed and corrected. An earlier court timetable also showed how a procedural step can briefly determine what happens next. Here, the consequences reach criminal proceedings and detention orders.
Conde-Pumpido has argued that the judgment should be clear, precise and binding. That would allow the Supreme Court to apply the constitutional doctrine in its own decision. EFE reported that the expected rulings on Bassa and Turull could open the way for Puigdemont's return. The Constitutional Court must first adopt the decision; the Supreme Court would then have to complete the required legal steps.
If the judgment is notified quickly, Pablo Llarena, the investigating magistrate in the procés case, could use the new constitutional doctrine to lift the arrest warrants for Puigdemont, Lluís Puig and Toni Comín. The Supreme Court's Second Chamber could then apply the amnesty to the convicted politicians without waiting for seven separate Constitutional Court judgments.
Tuesday's session will also deal with Macías's Turull appeal. The court will consider whether he keeps the case and presents it again at the next plenary meeting. It could instead reassign the appeal, probably to Conde-Pumpido, so the new doctrine can be applied. The case could also be declared without purpose if the Supreme Court grants Turull the amnesty first. The other five cases are expected to follow the same route in the coming days.
The practical effect depends on each politician's legal status. Politicians whose convictions include disqualification from public office could stand for public positions again after receiving amnesty. Those still being prosecuted could return to Spain without facing detention.
The Constitutional Court is preparing the legal rule the Supreme Court can apply across the group. Conde-Pumpido's ruling would so be the decisive institutional step in the dispute. The fugitives' return would then depend on the Supreme Court's subsequent decisions, not simply on a political promise.
