The General Council of the Judiciary urges the Ministry of Justice to reverse its refusal to fund reinforcements for 62 courts. The decision could halt essential judicial proceedings and affect citizens’ rights.
The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) has issued a sharp warning to the Ministry of Justice after the government refused to finance reinforcement measures for 62 courts across Spain. The CGPJ’s executive body, the Comisión Permanente, cautioned that this move could force the suspension of judicial activities deemed essential for upholding citizens’ rights. The dispute centers on the ministry’s decision to deny funding for most of the requested reinforcements, citing a significant overshoot of the agreed budget limit.
According to the Ministry of Justice, 232 support measures have already been approved this year, with only 64 denied. Officials argue that the CGPJ’s requests would have pushed spending on reinforcements to nearly €12 million—well above the €7.2 million cap set by the last protocol signed in 2019. The ministry also noted that a new agreement for €8 million has been pending since March, and that the value of approved reinforcements in 2026 already exceeds the current budget framework.
The CGPJ criticized the ministry for communicating its decision at the last minute, specifically on the eve of the deadline for approving or extending these measures. This timing, the council said, left no room to propose alternatives or adjustments to mitigate the impact. Among the denied requests was a reinforcement judge for the Audiencia Nacional’s Central Court of Instruction Number 1, a key post currently held by Francisco de Jorge. Most of the rejected measures relate to the civil jurisdiction, where case backlogs and mass litigation—such as floor clause disputes and airline claims—are common.
Ministry sources emphasized that many reinforcement requests are linked to mass litigation issues, for which new mechanisms have been introduced under the Law of Efficiency. These include the ‘pleito testigo’ (pilot case), extension of effects, and the concept of abuse of rights, all designed to streamline proceedings without additional public spending. The ministry expressed concern that the CGPJ is not making full use of these tools, which were specifically created to address such challenges.
Despite the current standoff, the Ministry of Justice highlighted the creation of a record 500 new judicial positions under the same law, expressing hope that this expansion will reduce the structural need for reinforcements. The CGPJ’s unanimous statement, signed by all seven members of the Comisión Permanente—including both conservative and progressive representatives—has caused unease among some in the progressive camp, who viewed the warning as a last-resort measure intended to prompt dialogue rather than escalate tensions.
This latest clash follows a series of disputes between the judiciary and the government, including controversies over executive criticism of judicial decisions and the rollout of new courts of first instance. However, there was a brief period of cooperation when both sides agreed to create 500 new judge positions. The ongoing friction reflects broader debates about judicial independence and resource allocation in Spain’s legal system. For context, similar tensions over judicial decisions and government intervention have surfaced in other high-profile cases, such as the recent suspension of a major corruption sentence by the Supreme Court, as reported in coverage of the Aldama case.
On the same day as the CGPJ’s warning, Justice Minister Félix Bolaños presented a review of the first year of the new courts of first instance. He described the results as “reasonably positive,” noting a 7.3% increase in scheduled trials and a 5.4% rise in hearings, while new litigation dropped by 10% overall and by more than 21% in civil matters. Bolaños attributed these trends to the mandatory use of alternative dispute resolution methods introduced in April 2025. According to the ministry, this shift has led to a modest decline in pending civil cases for the first time in a decade, excluding the pandemic period. The minister also stressed that the data aligns with figures provided by the CGPJ and reminded critics that the creation of the new courts was a unanimous demand from the judicial sector, including all associations.
Spain’s judicial system has faced persistent challenges with case backlogs and resource constraints. The current dispute over reinforcement funding highlights the ongoing struggle to balance budgetary discipline with the need to ensure timely and effective justice. The introduction of new legal tools and the expansion of judicial staff are intended to address these issues, but the effectiveness of these measures will depend on continued cooperation between the judiciary and the government. As the debate continues, the practical impact on court operations and citizens’ access to justice remains a central concern.
