A 6 October court decision has not yet cleared the way for Carles Puigdemont to return to Catalonia. The amnesty’s application in his case remains unresolved, and his political team is weighing whether to frame his arrival as the return of a former president rather than a party leader’s campaign appearance.
Journalist Maiol Roger offered that assessment during the latest edition of Col·lapse on TV3. Speaking on the debate programme hosted by Jordi González, Roger said expectations of an immediate return had weakened for two reasons: Judge Pablo Llarena’s legal position and the institutional meaning Puigdemont wants to give the event.
Puigdemont left Spain in 2017 after the declaration of Catalan independence and has lived in Belgium since. Spain’s parliament approved the amnesty law in 2024, but its application to the embezzlement allegations remained subject to a separate judicial dispute.
The legal issue is narrow but consequential. On 6 October, the Constitutional Court voted in favour of the Supreme Court’s application of the amnesty to the leaders of the procés. Llarena then removed the order for Puigdemont’s search and detention. As the programme explained, the judge lifted the detention measure without applying the amnesty itself at this stage.
That distinction leaves Puigdemont exposed to a possible reversal if he returns before the amnesty question is settled in his case.
Roger said the former president’s entourage does not currently expect him to return before the elections to campaign. Its preferred scenario would present him as “the president who returns to Catalonia”. That wording puts the event in an institutional frame, apart from an ordinary party appearance.
The decisions come as Spain prepares for early parliamentary elections on 29 November 2026, raising the political stakes of any return. Puigdemont has said the amnesty removes the judicial prosecution but does not resolve the underlying question of Catalan independence. The timing depends on the court process and the image his entourage wants to project. Roger stressed that the situation could still change and that no final decision had been made.
Spain’s General Council of the Judiciary set out the legal qualification. Llarena’s 6 October decision removed the national search and detention orders for Puigdemont and two other former Catalan officials, Antoni Comín and Lluís Puig, after the Constitutional Court accepted former Catalan minister Dolors Bassa’s challenge concerning the amnesty law’s application to the alleged misuse of public funds. The ruling does not itself apply the amnesty. Criminal liability and the remaining procedural questions are still unresolved.
Information from Reuters, the two court decisions removed the basic practical barrier to Puigdemont’s return. The Constitutional Court recognised that the amnesty could apply to the embezzlement accusations, after which the Supreme Court judge cancelled the arrest warrant. The Supreme Court must still examine the full Constitutional Court ruling and issue a separate reasoned decision that could confirm or alter the temporary measure.
The difference between lifting an arrest order and applying the amnesty lies basic to the uncertainty. It explains why the judicial development reported in earlier coverage did not lead to an immediate appearance in Catalonia.
For now, the available information points to a controlled delay, not an imminent border crossing. Llarena’s decision means Puigdemont can return without facing detention under that particular order, but it has not removed every legal risk or completed the amnesty process in his case. Maiol Roger described a later arrival with presidential symbolism as the more likely possibility, while stressing that no final decision had been made.
