The Plenary of the Constitutional Court has annulled as unconstitutional the Law of Local Institutions of Euskadi, understanding that article 6.2 "undermines" the use of Spanish and grants a "preferential" use to Euskera. This article, designed for town halls in predominantly Basque-speaking areas, allowed calls, minutes, agendas or communications between town halls to be drawn up only in Basque, "as long as the rights of any member of the local entity who may claim validly the lack of knowledge of Basque”.
The Constitutional Court, however, upholds Vox's appeal and points out that this regulation "breaks the linguistic balance between the two co-official languages by conditioning the use of Spanish on ignorance of Basque".
The plenary decision has two particular votes, by Judge Laura Díez and Judge Ramón Sáez, who consider that the question of unconstitutionality should have been dismissed.
In his opinion, the law respects the constitutional jurisprudence that says that the legislator can adopt linguistic policy measures tending to correct possible situations of imbalance and that the public powers must address citizens and members of local corporations in the language chosen by these, "both conditions are scrupulously met in the norm".
The magistrates refer to the jurisprudence that indicates that the non-comprehension of the co-official language has always been the reason behind the obligation of the public powers to address citizens in Spanish to state that "the challenged rule only reflects now this obligation to the sphere of local corporations".
The article of the TC considered unconstitutional says the following in its point 2: "The calls, agendas, motions, individual votes, proposals for agreement, opinions of the information commissions, agreements and minutes of the bodies of local entities may be drafted in Basque. This power may be exercised, in the aforementioned cases, as long as the rights of any member of the local entity who can validly claim ignorance of the Basque language are not infringed, without prejudice to the provisions of Law 10/1982, of November 24. , basic standardization and use of Basque. When the resolutions, minutes and agreements are drawn up in Basque, the copies or extracts will be sent in this language to the Autonomous Administration and the State Administration, in compliance with the provisions of the basic legislation of the local regime.
In the following section, 6.3, he qualifies that "regardless of whether local entities may use one of the two official languages" in their relations with other institutions or with individuals, "they must arbitrate the pertinent mechanisms so that the right of citizens to receiving such communications in the other official language can be made effective without formalities or conditions that entail a burden or obligation for citizens.
The Constitutional, in any case, considers that the norm causes an unjustified and disproportionate imbalance in the use of Spanish, by establishing formalities or conditions so that the representatives of local entities have the obligation to also write in this language.
From his point of view, the rule "breaks the linguistic balance between the two co-official languages by conditioning the use of Spanish on ignorance of Basque, so that the rights of free choice in linguistic matters of those who represent citizens in local entities are unreasonably restricted.
The court recalled that the Constitution "does not oppose the adoption of a policy focused on the defense and promotion of the co-official language. Quite the contrary, the Constitution refers to the need to protect and respect the different linguistic modalities of Spain as part of of our cultural heritage.
The ruling explains that "the local entities of the Basque Country, as a public power, cannot have a preference for either of the two official languages" and that "repeatedly, this court has held that citizens have the right to use Spanish or the language of the autonomous community in its relations with all public institutions".
