This is a brief outline of some of the key relevant legal issues in the Spanish Constitution and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in relation to the crisis in Catalonia.
The King of Spain made a speech tonight (October 3) which is seriously concerning. The notes below are not intended to address the fascinating political situation in Catalonia right now, but simply aim to outline some of the key legal issues and constitutional articles you may have heard bandied about regarding the Spanish Constitution and the EU Treaty.
Speech by King Felipe
Leaving aside his description of Catalans as being “unacceptably disloyal”, and his failure to condemn the violence on Sunday, King Felipe VI made repeated calls on the Spanish government to act. He stated repeatedly that the duty of the Spanish state is to uphold the Constitution, and to ensure the constitutional basis for Catalonia and its institutions.
The Spanish Constitution (adopted in 1978 during the so-called “Transition” from Francoist fascism) includes several relevant and well-known articles – namely Articles 2, 8 and 155 – which have led Catalans and observers to believe this amounts to a call for the suspension of the Catalan government at the very least; the likely imposition of a state of exception (emergency); or an outright military coup at worst.
Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution affirms the “indissoluble unity” of “the Spanish nation”.
Article 8 states it is the mission of the Armed Forces to “defend the territorial integrity” of Spain. Usually, in the international arena, this means defending the state from external attack, but in the Spanish state is has been interpreted politically and legally to mean defending the state from both invasion and secession.
The United Nation’s Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable Social Order, Alfred De Zayas, yesterday tweeted: “The principle of territorial integrity protects States from other States, but cannot prohibit the self-determination of peoples”.
And Article 155, the most important in this case, states that if any of the autonomous communities fail to meet their obligations under the law and Constitution, or “act in a way seriously prejudicing the general interests of Spain”, the Government can control of the bodies of the autonomous government and impose the “measures necessary in order to compel the latter forcibly to meet said obligations, or in order to protect the above mentioned general interests” of the Spanish state.
In other words, Article 155 is the Direct Rule provision. Of course, the suspension of the Catalan government in this way would probably have to be backed up by jailing the government representatives, and the likely mass deployment of the Guardia Civil, and possibly troops, given the mass mobilisation of Catalan society.
To me the King’s speech sounded very much like an indication that Art 155 will be triggered. The leader of Ciudadanos has already called for Art 155 to be triggered in order to prevent a declaration of independence by the Catalan government.
The Catalan government has not yet declared independence following the results of Sunday’s vote. Obviously they must be engaged in behind the scenes efforts with the international community in particular, but they run the risk their government will be suspended before the declaration.
Tonight Catalan President Carles Puigdemont told the BBC that the Catalan government will declare independence “at the end of this week or the beginning of next”.
Sanctioning of EU Member State under EU Treaty
The other issue I wanted to reflect on is the possibility to initiate action against Spain under the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) in response to Sunday’s violence, or in response to the possible future triggering of Art 155 of the Spanish constitution/a state of exception/martial law being imposed in Catalonia.
Some Catalan representatives and international supporters have called for the triggering of Article 7 of the TFEU against Spain in response to the violence in Catalonia.
This is definitely something European progressives should call for in relation to both their own governments and the European Parliament.
However, the EU procedure is designed to be so difficult and to require such a strong majority that it makes it virtually meaningless (surprise).
It has never yet been invoked, despite the possibility of it being raised in relation to Hungary and Poland recently.
Article 7 can be invoked in order to defend the “EU values” specified in Article 2 of the TFEU.
These are: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.
Article 7 has three stages of procedure ending in sanctions:
1) A procedure to declare the existence of a clear risk of a “serious breach” of Article 2 values. The procedure must be invoked by a “reasoned proposal” by either: one-third of Member States/the European Parliament/the Commission.
So a call for the European Parliament to make a reasoned proposal is definitely an option; as is a call for the Irish government or other EU governments to make such a reasoned proposal to the Council and seek the support for at least one third of Member States.
Then the Council, acting by a majority of 4/5 of its members, and after getting European Parliament consent, “may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2”.
Before making such a determination, the Council will allow the relevant Member State to respond, and may propose recommendations to the State.
2) The second phase is a procedure to determine whether a “serious and persistent breach” of Article 2 values has occurred. This requires the Commission or one-third of Member States to call on the Council to declare unanimously that a breach has occurred, with the European Parliament’s consent.
This is where the process goes from unlikely to virtually impossible given the strong backing of the Spanish position by both conservative and social-democratic forces in power across the EU.
3) The third step is sanctions. If the conditions of (1) and (2) are met, the Council can suspend rights of the relevant Member State with a qualified majority, which includes suspending the Member State’s voting rights in Council.
Let me finish by reiterating the point above – that despite the legal obstacles, progressives should absolutely attempt to invoke Article 7 of the TFEU.
But the limitations on progressive actions imposed by the EU’s architecture, treaties and procedures are similar to the limitations of achieving progressive change under the Spanish Constitution.
We certainly can’t rely in the slightest on the legal or procedural mechanisms of the EU in order to effectively display solidarity with the Catalan struggle for self-determination.
We need to do this with the tried and tested methods of old – pressuring our governments and EU leaders to support the Catalan people by all available means, including by exerting maximum pressure on the streets, and in local, state, EU and international political institutions; and by pressuring national governments to summon Spanish ambassadors and to suspend diplomatic ties with Madrid.
The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation, the common and indivisible country of all Spaniards; it recognises and guarantees the right to autonomy of the nationalities and regions of which it is composed, and the solidarity amongst them all
1. The mission of the Armed Forces, comprising the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, is to guarantee the sovereignty and independence of Spain and to defend its territorial integrity and the constitutional order.
1. If an Autonomous Community does not fulfil the obligations imposed upon it by the Constitution or other laws, or acts in a way seriously prejudicing the general interests of Spain, the Government, after lodging a complaint with the President of the Autonomous Community and failing to receive satisfaction therefore, may, following approval granted by an absolute majority of the Senate, take the measures necessary in order to compel the latter forcibly to meet said obligations, or in order to protect the above-mentioned general interests.
TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EU
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
1. On a reasoned proposal by one third of the Member States, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission, the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2.
Before making such a determination, the Council shall hear the Member State in question and may address recommendations to it, acting in accordance with the same procedure.
The Council shall regularly verify that the grounds on which such a determination was made continue to apply.
2. The European Council, acting by unanimity on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the Commission and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2, after inviting the Member State in question to submit its observations.
3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 has been made, the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide to suspend certain of the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council. In doing so, the Council shall take into account the possible consequences of such a suspension on the rights and obligations of natural and legal persons.
The obligations of the Member State in question under the Treaties shall in any case continue to be binding on that State.
4. The Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide subsequently to vary or revoke measures taken under paragraph 3 in response to changes in the situation which led to their being imposed.
5. The voting arrangements applying to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council for the purposes of this Article are laid down in Article 354 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.