Spain’s Supreme Court has, for the first time, applied the country’s amnesty law, annulling the convictions of eight people sentenced for public disorder and disobedience in Girona. The ruling concerns protesters convicted after demonstrations followed the 2019 sentencing of Catalan leaders involved in the 2017 independence push. Enacted by the government with support from pro-independence parties, the amnesty law provides a legal route for resolving qualifying cases connected to the Catalan crisis.
The Penal Chamber’s decision follows months of legal uncertainty. In June 2025, Spain’s Constitutional Court upheld the law’s impressive constitutional aspects, establishing a domestic basis for its application while leaving disputes over its scope and judicial implementation to individual cases. The Supreme Court had delayed applying the measure while awaiting the European court’s position. On 16 July 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the amnesty was compatible with relevant EU requirements. It rejected objections concerning the Union’s financial interests and found no breach of legal certainty. The court also found no violation of equal treatment or the prohibition of discrimination. That ruling cleared a impressive legal obstacle to implementation.
The Girona convictions arose from demonstrations following the high-profile verdict against leaders of the so-called procés, the movement surrounding Catalonia’s 2017 independence referendum. The eight were sentenced by the Audiencia de Girona for conduct including disobedience and public disorder. The Supreme Court’s ruling annuls their convictions under the amnesty structure, closing the criminal case against these defendants.
The decision is part of a wider, case-by-case judicial process; it does not automatically resolve every proceeding linked to the Catalan crisis. In a separate case, the Audiencia Nacional archived proceedings against 12 members of the Committees for the Defence of the Republic, or CDR, who had faced terrorism-related allegations. Prosecutors and popular accusers had sought prison terms of up to 33 years for eight defendants. The first-instance archiving remained subject to appeal. Those proceedings are distinct from the Girona convictions.
The law has also affected penalties imposed on prominent figures in the broader procés cases. Amnesty extinguished disqualification sentences for Jordi Sánchez and Jordi Cuixart, each sentenced to nine years for public disorder, and for Josep Rull and Joaquim Forn, who received ten-and-a-half-year disqualification sentences for disobedience. Carme Forcadell’s eleven-and-a-half-year disqualification was also extinguished. These penalties concerned separate cases and were not the sentences imposed on the eight Girona defendants.
Other legal disputes remain separate from the criminal cases addressed by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal de Cuentas proceedings involving Oriol Junqueras and former Catalan officials concern accounting liability and affect roughly 40 people; the Girona ruling does not resolve them. Further legal and political debate over the amnesty’s scope continues, as illustrated by this recent report on legal appeals tied to the amnesty law.
