The Amnesty Law and its review by the Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union, currently under consideration in the Parliament of Navarre

The Parliament of Navarre hosted the 27th Parliamentary classroom workshop classroom focused on analyzing Constitutional Court Ruling 137/2025 of June 26 regarding the Amnesty Law and the possible approaches that European oversight of the law might take.

The event, organized by the Parliamentary classroom the University of Navarra, drew a large audience, consisting mainly of students, and was also attended by members of the Navarre Parliament from various political parties and members of the Presiding Board.

The workshop opened by Unai Hualde, President of the Parliament of Navarre, who highlighted the significance of topic and political topic under discussion, as well as the importance of the partnership the parliamentary institution and the University of Navarra. Javier Fajardo, Associate Dean Students at the University of Navarra, also spoke at the opening, emphasizing the university’s commitment to dialogue and the rational analysis of matters of public interest. Asunción de la Iglesia, director of classroom the University of Navarra and a researcher on the independence of the Constitutional Court, expressed her gratitude for the long-standing partnership and discussed the workshop focus: the landmark ruling, which will be analyzed with scientific rigor.

The lecture was position César Aguado Renedo, Full Professor Constitutional Law the Autonomous University of Madrid, who offered a critical analysis of Constitutional Court Ruling 137/2025 on the Amnesty Law. Aguado explained that the ruling, approved by a narrow margin of six votes in favor and four against, declares unconstitutional and null and void article . article , paragraph two, of the law, which allowed for impunity for illegal activities initiated before November 13, 2023.

He also pointed out that article .1 is unconstitutional—though not void—in relation to article , on the grounds that the law benefits only those who committed illegal acts in support of secession. Furthermore, he noted that the Constitutional Court has ruled that Articles 5 through 16 of the law lack organic status, which means that only the first four articles retain such status.

This was followed by a panel discussion on Constitutional Court Ruling 137/2025. Cecilia Rosado, a tenured professor of Constitutional Law Rey Juan Carlos University, addressed the issues of recusal and disqualification of justices on the Constitutional Court, noting that these mechanisms are not adequately resolving conflicts of impartiality.

Federico de Montalvo, from the Pontifical University of Comillas “ICADE,” discussed the Constitutional Court’s evolutionary interpretation of the Constitution, questioning whether the Court merely interprets the Constitution or, at times, reinterprets it.

Ibor Fernandes Romero, from the Cardenal Cisneros Center (UCM), focused his remarks on the dissenting opinions in the amnesty ruling, highlighting their legal significance and their potential influence on future debates, both nationally and internationally.

The workshop featured a panel discussion on the Amnesty Law in the European context. Carlos Sánchez de Pazos Peigneux, from Rey Juan Carlos University, explained the oversight exercised by the Court of Justice of the European Union over amnesty through the preliminary ruling mechanism. Fernando Simón Yarza, Full Professor Constitutional Law the University of Navarra, analyzed the Venice Commission’s opinion on the proposed Organic Law on Amnesty. Simón explained that while the Venice Commission did not rule on the constitutionality or compatibility with EU law, it did identify the temporal scope of the amnesty and potential judicial interference as problems, concluding that the law has deepened social and political division in Spain. 

Enrique Fliquete Liso, from the University of Valencia, discussed the European Court of Human Rights’ position on amnesties, explaining that the court examines whether amnesties violate or remedy human rights, and that its case law is “inconsistent” in this area.

Patricia Rodríguez patron saint, a tenured professor at the Autonomous University of Madrid and principal investigator—along with Asunción de la Iglesia—of project research project research Importance of the Constitutional Court’s Independence for the Defense of Constitutional Democracy,” took part by moderating the discussions and sharing her insights. Likewise, Professor María Isabel Álvarez Vez, a full professor at the Pontifical University of Comillas, led, moderated, and actively participated in the panel discussion on the amnesty law before the European Court. 

The presentations were followed by a lively and lengthy discussion which the students asked numerous questions. The workshop with a reflection on the importance of upholding the rule of law, described as a “wonderful anomaly” that stands in contrast to humanity’s historical trends. The speakers agreed on the need for a rigorous and goal analysis goal the Amnesty Law, as well as on the importance of the independence and impartiality of constitutional justice to guarantee the protection of citizens and the stability of the democratic system, and they delivered a message to university students regarding their current and future responsibilities and the need to prepare themselves and value institutions.

This 27th workshop was organized in partnership several universities participating in the aforementioned research project on the independence of the constitutional judiciary.

The event took place as framework classroom Parliamentary Law classroom , which is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year. Since its launch in 2002, it has brought together leading national and international experts for conference, roundtables, meetings with parliamentarians, and lectures. For years, it has also promoted research awards research the parliamentary institution and partnership activities partnership the university and Parliament, serving as a bridge between these institutions, the university, and society to reflect on political and constitutional issues through study and dialogue.