The Constitutional Court enjoys a progressive majority to decide on the appeals of unconstitutionality presented by the different parties and autonomous communities against a good number of laws, but this majority is in danger of being reduced if the challenges that the PP has presented to be successful. refrain from deciding on seven laws pending sentencing, against the former Minister of Justice, Juan Carlos Campo and the former Director General of the Presidency of the government, Laura Díez, who also held a position in the Generalitat de Catalunya.
These two magistrates of the Constitutional Court were recently appointed to their positions, at the proposal of the Government, of which they were part, and it is the reason why the PP considers that they cannot intervene in the deliberation of the constitutionality of seven laws approved while they were in their positions in the government. If these challenges were successful, the progressive sector would be left with five magistrates in the High Court, the same ones that the conservative sector should have, although it currently only has four, because one is pending by appointment of the Senate, whose proposal would correspond to the PP, but that the PSOE refuses to appoint until the General Council of the Judiciary is renewed.
The request for recusal presented by the Popular Group of Congress against former Minister Campo and former Director General Laura Díez refers to the unconstitutionality appeals presented at the time by this party against the Royal Decree-Law of January 19, 2021, of protection of consumers and users in situations of social and economic vulnerability, as the PP understands that the Government does not respect private property and favors squatting. Likewise, the challenge is requested in the appeal against various provisions of the Budget Law of 2021 that restored the Wealth Tax; against the education law, called the Celaá law; and against the Judiciary Law of July 1, 2021, which limited the powers of the General Council of the Judiciary when it was in office, to force its renewal.
The PP also challenges these two former high officials of Moncloa in the cases on the so-called euthanasia law; on the distribution on digital platforms or the rider law, as well as against various points of the Royal Decree-Law of May 4, 2021 on the state of alarm for Covid; and against several articles of a decree law and a law of Catalonia, of 2022, on linguistic projects and the use of official languages in non-university education. In the latter case, Laura Díez is challenged because she participated in the preparation of opinions on language teaching when she was part of the Council of Statutory Guarantees of Catalonia
On the other hand, the PP seeks the recusal of the former Minister of Justice Juan Carlos Campo in the amparo appeal filed by the PP in relation to the amendments on the reform of the organic laws of the Constitutional Court and the General Council of the Judiciary, which they wanted to introduce into the regulations on the repeal of sedition and reduction of embezzlement, and which were paralyzed in the Senate by a decision of the Constitutional Court that accepted the PP's request to issue extremely precautionary measures.
In this case, the former Minister Campo, who was no longer in the Government, is challenged in the case of the appeal for amparo before the Constitutional Court against the agreement of the Bureau of the Justice Commission of the Congress of December 12, 2022 and the agreement of the president of said Commission, of December 13 of the same year (amendments 61 and 62).
According to sources from the Popular Group, the recusals are presented when the PP considers that both magistrates appointed in the TC by the Government incur in any of the causes of recusal provided by law. Among the grounds for recusal included in said regulations are intimate friendship or manifest enmity with any of the parties; having held a public position, held a job or exercised a profession on the occasion of which they have participated directly or indirectly in the matter that is the subject of the lawsuit or cause or in another related to it; or have held a public office, held a job or exercised a profession on the occasion of which they have participated directly or indirectly in the matter that is the subject of the lawsuit or cause or in another related to it.
