Vox wants Sumar's amendment removed from an education bill. The proposal would give legal force to suspended instructions affecting Spain's 'ley de nietos' and CERA registration.
Vox is asking Congress to block Sumar's attempt to add the disputed 'ley de nietos' measure to an education bill. The party says the amendment has no direct link to changes in education law or classroom ratios. If admitted, it could move a separate electoral dispute through legislation on an unrelated subject.
Vox sent its request to the Mesa of the Education, Training and Sports Committee in a submission obtained by ABC. The party also wants the committee to disclose any reports prepared by Congress lawyers on whether amendments are admissible. If no report exists on this issue, Vox is asking for a legal opinion on whether the proposal is sufficiently connected to the bill.
The 2022 Ley de Memoria Democrática opened a route to Spanish citizenship for descendants of exiles, creating the legal background for the later dispute over electoral registration abroad.
The dispute centers on a plan announced by Enrique Santiago, the Izquierda Unida spokesman and a member of Sumar. EFE and Europa Press reported that Sumar formally registered the amendment to give legal force to the instruction and protect the voting rights of people naturalised under the Ley de Memoria Democrática.
The proposal would establish in law the presumption that Spaniards who left the country between 18 July 1936 and 31 December 1955 were exiles. Sumar says the move responds to the Supreme Court's precautionary suspension of an instruction tied to the registration of more than 400,000 people in the Censo Electoral de Residentes Ausentes, or CERA, under the Ley de Memoria Democrática.
The suspension left people covered by the so-called 'ley de nietos' without automatic registration. They must now prove that they descend from Spaniards who suffered exile during the Civil War and the Franco dictatorship. The instruction on how to establish exile status was promoted by Sofía Puente at the Dirección General de Seguridad Jurídica y Fe Pública within the Ministry of Justice. Sofía Puente is the sister of minister Óscar Puente.
The Supreme Court acted after Vox and Iustitia Europa warned that upcoming elections could be irreversibly affected if the automatic registrations were not stopped. The instruction is currently without effect.
According to Diario Constitucional, the Supreme Court’s measure is precautionary rather than a final ruling on the substance of the case. Its reasoning focuses on the potential impact of the registration change on electoral transparency while the legal challenge is examined.
Vox is relying on Constitutional Court doctrine. Its objection is not limited to the subject of this amendment. In its submission, the party says amendments cannot be used as hidden legislative initiatives because that may restrict other parliamentarians' right to amend a bill.
The party cites Constitutional Court judgment 119/2011, which requires parliamentary bodies to assess whether an amendment is homogeneous with the text being changed. It also cites judgment 136/2011. That ruling warned against changing the meaning of an initiative through unrelated amendments. Vox further invokes Order 177/2022, which suspended Senate provisions that came from amendments with no minimum connection to the original proposal.
Vox also points to parliamentary precedents. In 2017, the Mesa of the Committee on Rules rejected an amendment because it went beyond the purpose of the original initiative and effectively created a different bill. In 2024, under Congress president Francina Armengol, the Mesa rejected nine amendments to a reform of Article 49 of the Constitution. It also rejected eight of the seventeen amendments submitted to reform Article 69.3 on the same grounds.
The committee's governing body has a majority made up of PSOE and the Government's coalition partner. If it admits the amendment, Vox says it could challenge the decision through an amparo appeal before the Constitutional Court.
The procedural fight is separate from the Cambrils ferry case reported earlier. Both disputes show how sharply different issues compete for attention in Spain's public agenda.
The central question is not whether the 'ley de nietos' is politically contentious. It is whether an education bill can be used to settle that dispute without a direct link between the two subjects.
The Constitutional Court precedents cited by Vox give its objection a clear legal basis. The committee's majority gives Sumar's proposal a realistic route to admission. The Mesa's decision will determine whether the amendment is rejected as procedurally unrelated or allowed to open a new institutional fight over electoral registration.
The outcome will also shape whether the contested presumption of exile remains governed by an administrative instruction or receives the force of legislation. The issue remains subject to the Supreme Court proceedings and further parliamentary steps.
