Warning against the amnesty as a blow to judicial independence

The Supreme Court's first application of the amnesty law raises serious concerns about the erosion of judicial independence and the rule of law in Spain. Opponents argue that the law was crafted to protect politicians and activists from accountability for actions that included public disorder. By absolving the eight convicts, the court is effectively endorsing a politically motivated law that interferes with judicial outcomes. Critics warn this sets a dangerous precedent: if laws can be tailored to erase convictions for specific groups, the principle of equal justice is undermined. The eight individuals were convicted by due process, and their amnesty appears to be a political settlement rather than a legal one. Furthermore, the law is being challenged before the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice. Applying it before those rulings risks creating legal inconsistencies. Many jurists believe the amnesty exceeds constitutional limits. The move may also embolden future unlawful actions if participants believe they will be pardoned later. For those who value legal accountability, this decision is a troubling step away from impartial justice.