Spain’s Supreme Court has denied Carles Puigdemont amnesty for alleged misuse of public funds, keeping his arrest order in place and leaving key figures in the Catalan independence case without relief.
Spain’s Supreme Court has rejected Carles Puigdemont’s attempt to have his alleged misuse of public funds covered by the new amnesty law. Judge Pablo Llanera, who oversees the ‘procés’ case, dismissed Puigdemont’s request despite a recent European Court of Justice (TJUE) ruling that weakened part of the prosecution’s case.
The decision means the national arrest warrant for Puigdemont remains active. Former Catalan minister Antoni Comin, who made a similar request, is in the same position. Both men, central to the 2017 Catalan independence movement, remain outside Spain as the legal process continues.
According to Tribunal de Cuentas, amnesty has already been applied to 35 individuals involved in budgetary cases related to the Catalan procés, covering nearly 5 million euros.
Judge Llanera’s explanation is direct. The TJUE’s July 16 decision found that the Catalan independence attempt did not affect the European Union’s financial interests. However, the judge argues that the amnesty law does not apply in cases where there was a personal financial benefit. The court says this alleged personal gain is enough to keep the misuse of funds charges in place, regardless of the EU court’s findings.
The Supreme Court’s position is that the European court’s ruling only removes one reason for denying amnesty. The other—suspected personal enrichment—remains. The judge also notes that Spain’s Constitutional Court has not yet decided how the amnesty law should apply to these cases, so further legal debate is possible, but there is no immediate change for Puigdemont or Comin.
Puigdemont’s lawyers tried to move the case to Catalan courts and argued that a parallel process at the Tribunal de Cuentas amounted to double jeopardy. The Supreme Court rejected both arguments, saying neither the location of the trial nor the existence of another proceeding justifies dropping the charges or lifting the arrest order.
EFE reports that the Constitutional Court is preparing to review the Supreme Court’s position, particularly regarding the arguments about EU financial interests. While a decision in favor of amnesty could influence the future of the arrest warrant, there is currently no immediate effect on Puigdemont’s legal status.
For now, the court’s decision means the amnesty law does not protect Puigdemont or Comin from the misuse of funds charges. The judge’s order also states that the lack of amnesty does not automatically justify all precautionary measures, but it does prevent the arrest warrant from being lifted for the reasons given so far.
This legal dispute comes as Spain’s judiciary faces criticism over its handling of politically sensitive cases. As reported earlier, tensions between the government and the judiciary have grown in recent years, with high-profile cases highlighting the limits of legal reforms and the persistence of established judicial positions.
The amnesty law was meant to ease political tensions, but the Supreme Court’s decision shows its limits when personal gain is alleged. Even after the TJUE’s intervention, the court has not changed its stance. For Puigdemont, the message is clear: the path to legal absolution remains closed, and Spain’s judiciary is not ready to give up its leverage in the Catalan case.
