Supreme Court magistrate Manuel Marchena calls public distrust in judges a tragedy. He urges limits on political parties acting as popular prosecutors, warning of increased politicisation and loss of confidence in Spain's justice system.
Supreme Court magistrate Manuel Marchena has described the widespread lack of trust in Spain's judiciary as a serious crisis, warning that public confidence is eroding as more citizens believe justice is not being served impartially. Speaking at the 'Justicia y Estado de Derecho' course at Universidad CEU San Pablo in El Escorial, Marchena argued that the perception of judges as politically biased is undermining social cohesion and the legitimacy of the courts.
Marchena specifically criticised the involvement of political parties in popular prosecution, stating that this practice fuels the politicisation of judicial proceedings. He maintained that while popular action should remain a legal tool, it must be subject to clear limits to prevent parties from using the courts as an extension of political battles. According to Marchena, allowing parties to act as prosecutors in cases involving rival groups distorts the process and deepens public suspicion towards the judiciary.
During his hour-long address, Marchena pointed out that only a handful of high-profile trials each year shape public perceptions of the relationship between politics and the justice system. He referenced recent survey data showing that three-quarters of Spaniards believe political parties attempt to influence judicial decisions, and that just 32.2% consider court rulings on political matters to be fair and impartial. These findings, he suggested, highlight the urgent need to reinforce judicial independence and restore public trust.
When questioned about the Supreme Court's handling of the 'procés' case involving Catalan independence leaders, Marchena declined to comment on whether the court should have awaited a European response before issuing its verdict. He emphasised the complexity of the legal issues involved and refrained from offering a definitive opinion. Marchena presided over the chamber that convicted the Catalan leaders in October 2019 for sedition, embezzlement, and disobedience, a decision that remains under scrutiny as the European Court of Justice prepares to rule on the compatibility of Spanish law with EU standards.
The debate over the influence of politics on Spain's judiciary has intensified as the European Union's top court is set to decide whether the country's amnesty law conflicts with EU regulations. This decision could have significant implications for more than 300 individuals, including Carles Puigdemont, and has placed the Supreme Court's approach under the spotlight. For further context on the EU court's upcoming ruling and its potential impact on Spain's legal landscape, see this detailed overview: EU court decision and its consequences for Spanish amnesty cases.
Spain's legal system allows for 'acción popular', a mechanism enabling citizens and organisations to participate in criminal prosecutions. However, the involvement of political parties in this process has long been controversial, with critics arguing it blurs the line between justice and politics. The Supreme Court's leadership, including Marchena, has repeatedly called for reforms to safeguard judicial independence and ensure that the courts are not perceived as instruments of political rivalry. As the country awaits the EU court's verdict, the debate over the boundaries of popular prosecution and the integrity of the judiciary remains at the forefront of national discussion.
