COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2021-07-20
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Spain, administrative transparency, coronavirus disease, corruption, democracy, epidemic, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 20.7.2021  SWD(2021) 710 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report    Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report    The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2021) 700 final} - {SWD(2021) 701 final} - {SWD(2021) 702 final} - {SWD(2021) 703 final} - {SWD(2021) 704 final} - {SWD(2021) 705 final} - {SWD(2021) 706 final} - {SWD(2021) 707 final} - {SWD(2021) 708 final} - {SWD(2021) 709 final} - {SWD(2021) 711 final} - {SWD(2021) 712 final} - {SWD(2021) 713 final} - {SWD(2021) 714 final} - {SWD(2021) 715 final} - {SWD(2021) 716 final} - {SWD(2021) 717 final} - {SWD(2021) 718 final} - {SWD(2021) 719 final} - {SWD(2021) 720 final} - {SWD(2021) 721 final} - {SWD(2021) 722 final} - {SWD(2021) 723 final} - {SWD(2021) 724 final} - {SWD(2021) 725 final} - {SWD(2021) 726 final} - {SWD(2021) 727 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

The  Spanish  justice  system  continues  to  face  some  challenges.  In  particular,  the  lack  of 
renewal of the Council for the Judiciary persists in the absence of an agreement in Parliament 
to renew a number of constitutional bodies. A welcome development was the withdrawal of a 
proposed  reform  of  the  system  for  the  selection  of  its  judges-members  that  would  have 
increased the perception  of the Council as vulnerable to  politicisation.  In this context,  calls 
were  made  for  establishing  a  system  of  election  of  the  judges-members  of  the  Council  by 
their peers in line with European standards. It is important that European standards are taken 
into account and that all relevant stakeholders are consulted. Concerns have also been raised 
regarding the competence of the Supreme Court for criminal liability of high-level positions, 
as  well  as  the  incompatibilities  regime  for  judges  and  prosecutors.  Several  measures  to 
improve the quality of justice have been adopted or are envisaged, such as the revisions of the 
legal  aid  system  and  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure,  as  well  as  three  draft  laws  on 
procedural, organisational and digital efficiency. The digitalisation of justice is progressing. 
There have been efforts to address backlogs such as the creation of new courts, but the low 
number of judges per inhabitant is a challenge. Concerns in relation to the autonomy of the 
prosecution service from the Government have been reiterated. 

Spain  continues  improving  the  institutional  and  legal  framework  to  prevent  and  combat 
corruption.  Anti-corruption  measures  follow  a  strategic  line  of  action  but  there  is  not  a 
dedicated  anti-corruption  strategy  that  would  guide  preventive  and  repressive  measures  to 
fight  corruption  in  a  comprehensive  manner.  As  regards  the  repression  of  corruption, 
corruption is criminalised under the Criminal Code and a number of dedicated institutions are 
in place. Prosecution authorities note that the lack of adequate resources affects the speed of 
the investigation and prosecution of corruption cases, including high-level corruption cases. 
As regards the prevention of corruption, Spain continues to improve its integrity framework 
and  has  committed  to  develop  legislation  on  key  areas  including  lobbying  transparency,  a 
Code  of  Ethics  for  civil  servants,  and  the  protection  of  whistleblowers.  The  new  code  of 
conduct  for  all  members  of  Congress  and  Senate  was  adopted  in  October  2020,  and  a  new 
Parliamentary Office for Conflicts of Interest monitors the parliamentarians’ compliance. 

As regards media freedom and pluralism, the Government is taking steps to address issues on 
access  to  information.  Challenges  remain  in  relation  to  transparency  of  media  ownership. 
Concerns about the functional independence and resources of the audio-visual regulator were 
raised  during  the  transposition  of  the  revised  Audio-Visual  Media  Services  Directive.  The 
Government  has  taken  some  measures  to  support  media  financially  in  the  context  of  the 
COVID-19  pandemic.  Journalists  have  continued  to  face  challenges  in  their  professional 
activities, but initiatives have been adopted to facilitate their work.  

As  regards  checks  and  balances,  the  new  Fourth  Open  Government  Plan  sets  renewed 
commitments  in  relation  to  public  participation,  transparency,  accountability  and  public 
integrity.  The  Autonomous  Regions  were  designated  as  competent  authorities  for  the 
implementation  of  the  emergency  measures  related  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic.  The 
Ombudsperson, in function ad interim since 2017, has received an exponential increase of the 
number  of  complaints  on  measures  taken  to  fight  against  the  COVID-19  pandemic. 
Challenges remain for the civil society space,  and a revision of the Citizen Security Law is 
ongoing, in light of the concerns raised. Several initiatives aimed at developing a rule of law 
culture, such as education programmes on justice for students, have taken place.  

1 

 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The  Spanish  judicial  system  is  composed  of  courts  of  general  jurisdiction1  and  specialised 
courts2, and is  structured  in  accordance with  the territorial organisation of the country. The 
Supreme Court is the highest judicial body in all areas of law. The Constitutional Court has 
jurisdiction  over  constitutional  matters,  as  well  as  individual  applications  concerning  due 
respect  for  fundamental  rights.  The  General  Council  for  the  Judiciary,  established  by  the 
Spanish Constitution, is the body of judicial self-governance, and ensures the independence 
of  courts  and  judges3.  As  such,  it  does  not  form  part  of  the  judiciary  itself.  It  exercises 
disciplinary  action  and  is  competent  to  appoint,  transfer  and  promote  judges,  as  well  as 
responsible  for  the  training  and  recruitment  of  judges.  The  public  prosecution  service  is 
integrated in  the judiciary  with  functional  autonomy, and pursues the mission of promoting 
justice in defence of the law, the rights of the citizens and the general interest. The Prosecutor 
General is appointed by the Head of State, upon proposal of the Government, following the 
consultation  of  the  General  Council  for  the  Judiciary4.  Spain  participates  in  the  European 
Public  Prosecutor’s  Office.  The  Local  Bars  are  public  law  organisations  of  professionals, 
independent from the public administration and do not depend on the budgets of the public 
authorities,  nor  are  their  assets  public.  They  have  competences  for  the  organisation  of  the 
profession and professional deontology, and approve their own code of ethics.  

Independence  

The level  of perceived  judicial  independence in Spain is  low amongst both the general 
public  and  companies.  Overall,  38%  of  the  general  population  and  39%  of  companies 
perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ in 20215. 
Both figures have decreased in comparison to 2020 (44% for the general public and 42% for 
companies), but they have increased in comparison to 2016 (30% for the general public and 
33%), showing no clear trend during the last five years.  

Concerns over the lack of renewal of the Council for the Judiciary persist, while some 
recent  developments  triggered  calls  for  election  of  its  judges-members  by  their  peers. 
The  Council  for  the  Judiciary  has  been  exercising  its  functions  ad  interim  since  December 
2018, thus prolonging the concerns that it might be perceived as vulnerable to politicisation, 
as  already  referred  in  the  2020  Rule  of  Law  Report6.  The  Parliament  is  responsible  for  the 
appointment of all its members7; that is subject to a qualified majority of three fifths. Since 

1   Covering  the  fields  of  civil,  criminal,  administrative  and  social  law.  In  total,  there  are  2269  first  instance 

courts of general jurisdiction. 

2   Commercial  courts,  EU  trademark  courts,  courts  with  special  duties  in  the  matter  of  criminal  sentencing, 
juvenile courts, courts dealing with violence against women, and other specialised courts that can be created 
by  resolution  of  the  General  Council  for  the  Judiciary.  In  total,  there  are  1465  first  instance  courts  of 
specialised jurisdiction. 

3   Art. 117 of the Spanish Constitution enshrines the independence of magistrates and judges. 
4   Art. 124(4) of the Spanish Constitution. 
5   Figures 48 and 50, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents  perceive  judicial  independence  as  fairly  good  and  very 
good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

6   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 2. 
7   According to Art. 122(3) of the Spanish Constitution, the Council consists of the President of the Supreme 
Court  (who  chairs)  and  of  20  individuals  –  12  judges  or  magistrates,  and  8  lawyers  or  other  jurists  of 
recognised competence with more than fifteen years of professional practice. While the Constitution requires 

2 

 
                                                 
 
2018,  negotiations  between  the  main  political  parties  are  in  a  stalemate8  and  there  has  not 
been significant progress to reach an agreement, despite numerous calls to proceed with the 
appointments9.  On  13  October  2020,  two  parliament  groups  tabled  a  draft  law10  aimed  at 
changing the election system of the judges-members of the Council to an absolute majority in 
the event of a second vote11. Following criticism by stakeholders12, the legislative process of 
the law was suspended and in May 2021 the parliamentary groups sponsoring the draft law 
withdrew  it  formally.  This  was  welcomed13,  as  the  draft  law  would  have  increased  the 
perception of the Council as vulnerable to politicisation. On 25 March 2021 the Parliament 
passed a law establishing an ad interim regime for the General Council for the Judiciary that 
adapts its functions when acting with an expired term of office14. This law entered into force 
on 30 March 202115. The new law prevents, among others, the acting Council from making 
appointments  for  top  judicial  positions16.  The  Constitutional  Court  has  been  seized  to 
ascertain  the  constitutionality  of  the  reform17.  In  the  context  of  the  withdrawn  reform 
amending  the  system  of  election,  calls  were  made  for  establishing  a  system  of  election  of 
judges-members by peers. Some associations of judges called for the 12 judges-members of 

the  eight  lawyers  and  other  jurists  to  be  appointed  by  a  three-fifths  majority  in  each  chamber  of  the 
Parliament (four by the Congress and four by the Senate), it does not specify how the members representing 
judges are to be appointed.  

8   2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Spain,  p.  2;  El  Mundo,  Más  de 
2.500 jueces se dirigen a la  Comisión Europea para alertar del "riesgo grave de violación del Estado de 
Derecho" en España, 12 April 2021. 

9   In this regard, the Venice Commission has stressed the importance of providing for qualified majorities but 
warned  about  the  risk  of  stalemates  and  recommended  to  devise  effective  and  solid  anti-deadlock 
mechanisms. Venice  Commission 2010, Report on the  Role of the Opposition in a democratic Parliament, 
CDL-AD(2010)025  and  Venice  Commission  2019,  Report  on  the  relationship  between  the  parliamentary 
majority and the opposition in a democracy: a checklist, CDL-AD(2019)015. In particular, the Commission 
of  Venice  has  pointed  that  the  “blocking  power”  of  the  opposition  is  not  absolute  and  that  a  qualified 
majority  rule  in  the  matters  of  appointment  should  not  prevent  for  a  very  long  time  the  appointment  of 
members of a collective body, since without them the State cannot function adequately. While each State has 
to devise its own system, in its Opinion on the draft law on amendments to the law on the Judicial Council 
and judges (CDL-AD(2018)015-f), the Venice  Commission has pointed that a possible alternative solution 
would be the partial appointment of members of the Council for the Judiciary that have already the support 
of a qualified majority, such as the lay members.  

10   Proposal of an Organic Law to modify Organic Law 6/1985, from 23 October 2020. 
11   According to the proposal, judges-members would continue to be elected by Parliament, but the necessary 
majority  of  3/5  would  only  be  required  in  a  first  vote  -  if  this  majority  could  not  be  reached,  the  election 
would be made in a second vote with the absolute majority. 

12   European Association of Judges, statement of 13 October 2020; GRECO, Letter to the Head of Delegation 
of Spain in GRECO, 14 October 2020; High Court of Justice of Madrid, Press Release, 19 October 2020; 
High  Court  of  Justice  of  Castilla  y  León,  Press  Release,  19  October  2020;  High  Court  of  Justice  of 
Extremadura, Press Release, 19 October 2020; High Court of Justice of Andalucía, Ceuta and Melilla, Press 
Release, 20 October 2020.  

13   For  example:  Judges  and  Magistrates’  Association  “Francisco  de  Vitoria”;  Judges  for  Democracy  and  the 
Professional Association of the Magistracy.  EuropaPress (2021) Los jueces achacan el giro de Moncloa de 
retirar  la  reforma  del  CGPJ  a  la "presión"  ejercida  y  el "toque" de  Europa, 21  April  2021; or  Comment 
from Judges for Democracy on 20 April 2021.  

14   Organic Law No. 4/2021, of 29 March. 
15   Although  the  Council  had  formally  requested  the  Congress  to  consult,  in  the  context  of  the  legislative 
procedure, relevant stakeholders such as the Council itself and the Venice Commission, this request was not 
followed up by the Parliament. 

16   The law prevents the acting Council to appoint the president of the Supreme Court, presidents of Provincial 
Courts and High Courts of Justice, president of the  National High  Court,  and presidents of Chambers and 
Supreme Court judges.  

17   By the main opposition party.  

3 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
the Council to be directly elected by their peers according to Council of Europe’s standards18, 
and the Council of Europe recalled that the European standards provide that at least half of 
the  Council’s  members  should  be  judges  elected  by  their  peers  from  all  levels  of  the 
judiciary19. It is important that these European standards20 are taken into account and that all 
relevant stakeholders are consulted21. 

There  are  concerns  related  to  the  competence  of  the  Supreme  Court  for  criminal 
liability  of  high-level  positions,  and  the  incompatibilities  regime  for  judges  and 
prosecutors. There are competence rules ratione personae in Spain on privileged jurisdiction 
in matters of criminal  responsibility of members  of the Government  and the legislative and 
judicial  branches22  (the  so-called  ‘aforamiento’).  The  Group  of  States  against  Corruption 
judges  and 
(GRECO)  recognises 
prosecutors23; it has also underscored the very broad terms of the regime of the aforamiento 
in  Spain  and  recommended  the  need  for  revision  of  the  system24.  Moreover,  stakeholders 
have criticised the fact that the incompatibilities regime for judges25 or prosecutors26 does not 
provide  for  ‘cooling-off  periods’  for  judges  or  prosecutors  having  been  members  of  the 
executive or legislative powers27. According to GRECO this situation raises questions from 
the point of view of the separation of powers and regarding the necessary independence and 
impartiality of judges in reality and in appearance28.  

independence  and 

impartiality  of 

individual 

the 

The autonomy of the prosecution service continues to raise questions and be discussed29.  
The  Prosecutor  General  has  publicly  called  on  the  need  to  reform  the  statute  of  the 

18   Letter  of  6  April  2021  from  three  associations  of  judges  (Asociación  Profesional  de  la  Magistratura, 
Asociación  Judicial  Francisco  de  Vitoria  and  Foro  Judicial  Independiente)  addressed  to  the  European 
Commission,  para.  14.  Moreover,  according  to  a  survey  by  the  Council  for  the  Judiciary  published  in 
October  2020  (Council  for  the  Judiciary  (2020),  La  justicia  vista  por  los  jueces.  Survey  carried  out  by 
Metroscopia, October 2020), 90% of the interviewed judges supported returning to the system of election of 
judges-members of the Council by their peers. 

19   GRECO, Letter to the Head of Delegation of Spain in GRECO, 14 October 2020.  
20   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.  
21   Opinion  no.10(2007)  of  the  Consultative  Council  of  European  Judges  (CCJE)  to  the  attention  of  the 
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the Council for the Judiciary at the service of society, 
of    23  November  2007,  para  87;  CCJE  Opinion  No.  23  (2020)  The  role  of  associations  of  judges  in 
supporting judicial independence, para. 47.  

22   According to  Art.  57 of  the  Organic  Law  No. 6/1985, of 1 July, the Supreme  Court  is  responsible  for the 
examination  and  trying  of  proceedings  brought  against  the  members  of  Government,  the  Presidents  of  the 
Congress  of  Deputies  and  the  Senate,  the  President  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  the  General  Council  of  the 
Judiciary, magistrates of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, the President of the National High 
Court  and  of  any  of  its  Chambers  and  the  Presidents  of  the  High  Courts  of  Justice,  magistrates  of  the 
National High Court or of a High Court of Justice, the State Prosecutor General, state prosecutors attached to 
the Chambers of the Supreme Court, the President and Counsellors of the Court of Auditors, the President 
and  Counsellors  of  the  Council  of  State  and  the  Ombudsperson.  Similar  provisions  are  established  by  the 
Statutes of Autonomy of the respective Autonomous Communities with regard to members of the regional 
governments and parliaments. 

23   GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report, para. 3. 
24   GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report, paras 118-123. 
25   Arts. 389-398 of the Organic Law No. 6/1985, of 1 July. 
26   Arts. 57-59 of the Organic Law No. 50/1981, of 30 December. 
27   See for instance, Contribution from the Independent Judicial Forum for the 2021 Rule of Law Report p. 5; 

Contribution from the Association of Prosecutors for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 8.  

28   GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report, para. 102-103. 
29   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 3. 

4 

 
                                                 
prosecution  service30  to  provide  it  with  greater  autonomy  in  terms  of  organisation,  budget, 
internal  regulation  and  training.  According  to  the  Prosecutor  General,  a  new  professional 
statute  should  also  look  into  the  relations  between  the  Government  and  the  Prosecutor 
General, as well as its method for appointment, as also expressed by multiple stakeholders31. 
As mentioned in the 2020 Rule of Law Report, the coincidence in the term of office of the 
Prosecutor  General  and  the  Government  may  affect  the  perception  of  independence.  In 
October 2020, the Code of Ethics for the Prosecutorial Career was approved32. The Code sets 
principles  and  ethical  obligations  for  prosecutors  in  relation  to,  among  others,  the  use  of 
social  media  and  interventions  in  the  media,  training,  conflicts  of  interest  and  assets 
declarations,  and  internal  relations.  Stakeholders  have  welcomed  the  adoption  of  the  Code, 
but  continue  pointing  to  the  need  to  update  the  disciplinary  regime  for  prosecutors  and 
judges33.  

A new statute for lawyers highlighting their independence has been approved. The new 
statute was adopted on 2 March 2021. The General Council of Spanish Lawyers was involved 
in the legislative process. The statute highlights the independence of lawyers and it sets new 
provisions  regarding  professional  secrecy.  The  statute  provides  that  chambers  of  lawyers 
shall  be  democratic,  autonomous,  and  transparent.  Under  the  new  statute,  chambers  are 
obliged  to  publicise  their  services  online.  It  also  sets  provisions  in  relation  to  the  right  to 
training and the promotion of gender equality in the legal profession. The provisions of the 
new statute appear to be consistent with Council of Europe recommendations34. 

Quality  

The  Parliament  adopted  a  new  law strengthening  the legal  aid  system.  Spain  is  among 
those  Member  States  having  a  higher  number  of  legal  aid  cases  per  100  000  habitants, 
although  it  has  one  of  the  lowest  budgets  allocated  per  case35.  On  9  March  2021,  a  royal 
decree  on  free  legal  aid  was  approved36,  strengthening  the  pre-existing  system.  The  royal 
decree reinforces provisions in relation to data protection, sets the frequency of payment in 
certain  Autonomous  Regions  that  have  not  taken  over  powers  in  the  management  of  the 
Justice system37, and establishes the creation of the National Council for Free Legal Aid, with 
the objective of promoting the coordination of the implementation of legal aid among public 
authorities with justice competences. The law seems to be consistent with Council of Europe 

30   Prosecution  Council  (2020).  La  Fiscal  General  del  Estado  impulsa  ante  las  asociaciones  un  plan  para 
afrontar  el  reto  de  la  reforma  procesal,  3  December  2020.  The  Prosecutor  General  has  insisted  that  such 
reform should be done in parallel to the ongoing revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 

31    Contribution from the Association of Prosecutors for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 9; Contribution from 
the  Judges  and  Magistrates’  Association  “Francisco  de  Vitoria”  for  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  12; 
Contribution  from  the  Independent  Judicial  Forum  for  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  12;  Contribution 
from the  Association Impulso Ciudadano for the  2021 Rule  of  Law  Report,  p. 7; Contribution  from  Civic 
Platform for the Judicial Independence for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 11.  

32   Prosecution Council (2020), Codigo Etico del Ministerio Fiscal. 
33   Contribution from the Association of Prosecutors for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, pp. 8-9. 
34   Council of Europe. Recommendation No. R(2000)21 on the freedom of exercise of the profession of lawyer.  
35   Council of Europe (2020). European judicial systems CEPEJ Evaluation Report (2020 Evaluation cycle).  
36   Royal Decree 141/2021, of 9 March, approving a regulation on free legal aid. 
37   The  management  of  the  Justice  system  is  managed  by  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  Autonomous  Regions  of 
Castilla and León, Castilla-La Mancha, Murcia, Baleares, Extremadura and the Autonomous Cities of Ceuta 
and Melilla. 

5 

 
                                                 
guidelines38  in  relation  to  quality  assurance  mechanisms,  organisation  of  legal  aid  schemes 
and availability of legal aid providers and data collection.  

A  proposal  for  the  revision  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  allocating  the  lead  of 
judicial  investigations  to  prosecutors  has  been  tabled.  On  24  November  2020,  the 
Government tabled a law reforming the Code of Criminal Procedure39. The draft law changes 
the  system  for  judicial  investigation,  which  would  be  led  by  prosecutors  instead  of 
investigative  judges,  as  it  is  now  the  case40.  The  draft  law  envisages  the  creation  of  the 
investigative  prosecutor  and  judges  responsible  for  procedural  guarantees.  The  victim  is 
given  a  specific  statute  and  provisions  on  protection  to  minor  and  disabled  people  are 
foreseen to be put in place. Stakeholders have welcomed the proposal, although it has been 
raised that additional autonomy and resources would be needed for prosecutors to take charge 
of the judicial investigation tasks41.  

Additional courts have been created in response to the consequences of the COVID-19 
pandemic, but the low number of judges per inhabitant is a challenge. During the state of 
alarm  declared  on  14  March  2020,  the  activity  of  courts  was  limited  for  three  months  and 
procedural deadlines were suspended. To deal with the consequent increased backlog and the 
foreseeable increase of litigation, 19 new courts have been established since December 2020 
and 14 more will be set up by the end of 202142. The new courts will mostly deal with social, 
commercial  and  administrative  cases.  However,  in  general,  the  number  of  judges  per 
inhabitant remains one of the lowest in the EU43, which could also affect the efficiency of the 
Spanish  justice  system44.  The  budget  per  capita  for  the  justice  system  and  the  budget  as  a 
percentage of GDP have not changed since 2017 and both figures are around EU average45. 

Further investments and projects on the digitalisation of justice are ongoing46. The use 
of ICT tools is well established in the justice system, and the digitalisation process has been 
further accelerated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Electronic communication tools in courts 
are  fully  in  place47,  with  examples  of  different  tools,  such  as  an  IT  tool  that  automatically 
transforms  recording  of  trials  and  hearings  into  text,  data  oriented  justice  projects,  legal 
certainty in videoconferencing, electronic and automatic proceedings such as notifications48. 
However, stakeholders have continued to point at shortcomings in relation to interoperability 

38   Council  of  Europe  (2021).  Guidelines  of  the  Committee  of  Ministers  of  the  Council  of  Europe  on  the 
efficiency  and  the  effectiveness  of  legal  aid  schemes  in  the  areas  of  civil  and  administrative  law. 
CM(2021)36. 

39   Anteproyecto de Ley Orgánica de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, aprobado por el Consejo de Ministros el 24  de 

noviembre de 2020.  

40   Currently,  the  system  confers  on  the  investigative  judge  the  power  to  lead  the  investigation,  while 
prosecutors  can  only  demand  the  adoption  of  precautionary  or  investigative  measures  to  be  taken  by  the 
judge (Art. 5, Law No. 50/1981 of 30 December).   

41   Association of Prosecutors (2021), Alegaciones que presenta la Asociación de Fiscales al Anteproyecto de 
la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal (LECRIM); Prosecution Council (2021), Comunicado del Consejo Fiscal 
al Anteproyecto de Ley Orgánica de Enjuiciamiento Criminal). 

42   Royal  Decree  1050/2020,  of  1  December,  on  the  creation  of  thirty-three  COVID-19  judicial  courts 

corresponding to 2020 programme.  
43   Ranking 23rd out 27 Member States. 
44   Figure 32, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
45   Figures 29 and 30, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
46   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, pp. 4-5. 
47   Figure 42, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
48   Input from Spain for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 12. 

6 

 
                                                 
issues between the management systems used in the different Autonomous Regions49. Spain 
is receiving support from the EU in the context of the project  Promotion of cyber justice in 
Spain, current phase II and phase III: that will include a component exclusively focused on 
quality and a feasibility study for a quality management software.  

Efficiency 

The efficiency of justice in Spain has continued experiencing challenges50. The clearance 
rate  for  litigious  civil  and  commercial  cases  increased  in  2019,  and  it  is  getting  closer  to 
100%.  However,  the  disposition  time  in  civil,  commercial,  and  administrative  cases  in  first 
instance  did  not  consolidate  a  positive  trend  and  remains  high51;  for  civil  and  commercial 
cases in the Supreme Court it noticeably increased since 2018, reaching 681 days52. The rate 
of  resolving  administrative  cases  decreased53.  The  number  of  pending  litigious  civil, 
commercial, and administrative cases is high and it has steadily increased since 201654.  

The  Government  has  continued  taking  a  number  of  legal  initiatives  aimed  to  increase 
the efficiency of the justice system55. On 15 December 2020, the Government tabled a law 
on the procedural efficiency of the public service of justice56. The law includes measures to 
shorten  the  length  of  procedures  in  all  four  jurisdictions  while  preserving  the  procedural 
guarantees of citizens as well as the establishment of appropriate alternative means of dispute 
settlement. In addition, on 20 April 2021, a law on the organisational efficiency of the justice 
system was tabled57. The draft law envisages the transformation of the unipersonal courts into 
431 Instance Tribunals (Tribunales de Instancia), the implementation of the Judicial Office58 
throughout  the  State,  and  the  creation  of  Justice  Offices  within  the  municipalities  that  will 
replace  the  former  Peace  Courts  (Juzgados  de  Paz).  The  Government  is  also  working  on  a 
draft  law  on  the  digital  efficiency  of  the  justice  system,  planned  for  summer  2021,  which 
would  enhance  the  legal  provisions  in  relation  to  data  management  and  allow  for  inter-
operability of applications within the justice system59.  

49   Contribution  from  the  General  Council  of  Spanish  Lawyers  for  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  9; 
Contribution from the Judges and Magistrates’ Association “Francisco de Vitoria” for the 2021 Rule of Law 
Report,  p. 16; Contribution  from the Independent Judicial  Forum  for the 2021 Rule of Law Report,  p. 17; 
Contribution from the Association of Prosecutors for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 12. 
50   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, pp. 5-6. 
51   Figure 6, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
52   Figure 8, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
53   Figures 9, 10 and 11, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
54   Figure 14, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
55   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 6. 
56   Draft law on measures for procedural efficiency of the public justice system. 
57   Draft law on measures for organisational efficiency of the public justice system.  
58   The organization of the Judicial office is implemented by two different types of Units: Procedural Units of 
Direct  Support,  responsible  of  assisting  judges  in  their  own  tasks;  and  Common  Procedural  Services, 
responsible of the management and implementation of procedural laws.   

59   These three reforms have been tabled as part of Component 11 of the Recovery and Resilience Plan of Spain 

submitted to the European Commission on 30 April 2021. 

7 

 
                                                 
II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

In  Spain,  the  Anti-Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office  (ACPO)60  performs  the  investigation, 
detection  and  prosecution  of  corruption  with  the  assistance  of  Law  Enforcement  Agencies 
(LEA) Attached Units – from the National Police61 and the Civil Guard62 - and Support Units 
of the State Tax Administration Agency (AEAT) and the General Intervention Board of the 
State  Administration  (IGAE),  all  of  whom  contribute  with  analytical  work63.  The  National 
Anti-Fraud Coordination Service64 oversees anti-fraud measures and conducts investigations 
at national level while several Autonomous Regions have their own offices to fight fraud in 
their  territories65.  The  Office  of  Conflicts  of  Interest  oversees  asset  declarations  for 
Government officials and political appointees66. Meanwhile, rules on transparency, access to 
public information and good governance are monitored by the Council of Transparency and 
Good Governance. 

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in 
the  public  sector  remains  relatively  low.  In  the  2020  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  by 
Transparency International, Spain scores 62/100 and ranks 9th in the European Union and 32th 
globally67. This perception has improved68 over the past five years69. 

The Government is currently discussing possible reinforcement of the system of access 
to and use of criminal information70. Several Ministries have agreed on a preliminary draft 
organic  law  laying  down  rules  facilitating  the  use  of  financial  and  other  information  to 
prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute criminal offences, including corruption71. In Spain, 

60   Law 10/1995, of 24 April, amending Law 50/1981, of 30 December, which regulates the Organic Statute of 
the  Public  Prosecutor's  Office  and  creates  the  Special  Prosecutor's  Office  for  the  Repression  of  Economic 
Crimes Related to Corruption. Official State Bulletin, 25 April 1995, n. 98, pp. 12102-2103. 

61   Law 10/1995, of 24 April 1995. 
62   Central Operative Unit of the Civil Guard, Royal Decree 769/1987.   
63   Anti-Corruption prosecutor’s Office (2019), Annual Report 2019, p. 698.  
64   Governed by the Additional Provision 25 of General Subsidies Law 38/2003, of 17 November.  
65   Catalonia Anti-Fraud Office, which is regulated by Law 14/2008, of 5 November 2015 of the Autonomous 
Region of Catalonia; Valencia Agency for the Prevention and Fight against Fraud and Corruption, which is 
regulated  by  Law  11/2016  of  28  November  2015  of  the  Autonomous  Region  of  Valencia;  Office  for 
Prevention and Fight against Corruption of the Balearic Islands, regulated by Law 16/2016 of 9 December 
2016  on  the  Balearic  Islands;  Municipal  Anti-Fraud  and  Corruption  Office  of  the  Madrid  City  Council, 
which  is  governed  by  its  Organic  Regulation  approved  by  agreement  of  the  Madrid  City  Council  of  23 
December  2016;  Office  for  Transparency  and  Good  Practice  of  the  City  of  Barcelona  (Directorate  of  the 
Analysis Service). 

66  These are political appointments made by Government decree and include secretaries of State, senior officials 

in ministries, ambassadors and chefs of public companies, among others. 

67    Transparency  International,  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2020  (2021),  pp.  2-3.  The  level  of  perceived 
corruption is categorised as  follows: low (the perception among experts and business executives of public 
sector  corruption scores  above  79);  relatively  low  (scores  between  79-60),  relatively  high  (scores  between 
59-50), high (scores below 50). 

68   In 2015 the score was 58, while, in 2020, the score is 62. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

69   The Eurobarometer data on corruption perception and experience of citizens and businesses as reported last     
year is updated every second year. The latest data set is the Special Eurobarometer 502 (2020) and the Flash 
Eurobarometer 482 (2019). 

70   Input from Spain for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 26. 
71   This preliminary organic law aims to implement the Directive (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 20 June 2019 laying down rules facilitating the use of financial and other information 

8 

 
                                                 
 
corruption  is  broadly  criminalised  under  the  1995  Criminal  Code72,  which  was  further 
amended in 2019 in this respect to introduce new corruption offences73. The Code includes 
offences, such as influence peddling74, embezzlement of public funds75, corruption by foreign 
officials and commercial bribery76. The 2019 reform revised the criminalisation of economic 
offences related to corruption, implementing GRECO recommendations in the process77.  

The  fight  against  corruption  in  Spain  follows  a  strategic  line  of  action  without  a 
dedicated  Anti-Corruption  Strategy78.  Although  the  Government  has  developed  several 
initiatives to strengthen integrity in public sector79, there is no holistic policy to prevent and 
reduce  corruption.  GRECO  has  recommended  to  develop  a  strategy  that  puts  together 
preventive measures to  detect and mitigate risk areas of conflicts of interest, with a plan of 
action for implementation80. Spain is receiving technical support from the EU in the context 
of  the  project  for  the  elaboration  of  a  National  Anti-Fraud  Strategy  aimed  at  ensuring 
effective protection of EU financial interests81. 

The implementation of the Strategy against Organised Crime is ongoing and is expected 
to be fully implemented within its 4-year timeframe (2019-2023). As reported in the 2020 
Rule of Law report82, the 2019 Strategy against Organised Crime highlights the importance to 
fight corruption83. Within the framework of the strategy, the 2020-2021 Special Security Plan 
for  Campo  de  Gibraltar  has  been  approved84.  The  Plan  aims  at  improving  specialisation, 
capacity  and  coordination  of  judges,  prosecutors  and  police  in  the  most  affected  sectors 
including  security,  customs  and  revenue85.  This  Plan  has  been  extended  to  particularly 

for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences, and repealing Council 
Decision 2000/642/JHA. The text was submitted to public consultation until 17 December 2019.  

72   Organic  Law  10/1995,  of  November  23,  of  the  Penal  Code  (L1/2015). The  latest  revision  of  the  Criminal 

Code dates of 2021 but it is not related to corruption. 

73   Organic Law 1/2019, of 20 February, amending Organic Law 10/1995 of 23 November on the Penal Code to 
transpose  European  Union  Directives  into  the  financial  and  terrorism  fields  and  to  address  international 
issues (L 1/2019).  

74   Arts. 428, 429 and 430, Law 1/2015. 
75   Art. 435, Law 1/2019. 
76   Art. 286 bis, Law 1/2019. 
77   GRECO Third Evaluation Round – Second Addendum to the Second Compliance Report, para. 64. 
78   The Spanish Government has adopted a range of measures to fight against forms of corruption including the 
National Strategy against Organised Crime or the specialisation of Law enforcement authorities such as the 
judicial police units treating matters of economic crimes and corruption. More information in the 2020 Rule 
of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 7. 

79   The  Spanish  Government  is  a  member  of  the  Alliance  for  Open  Government,  a  multilateral  organisation 
made  up  of  public  administration  and  civil  society  reformers,  whose  objective  is  to  ensure  that  public 
administrations  act  transparently,  promote  public  integrity,  partnership  and  citizen  participation,  are 
accountable  and  inclusive.  This  has  resulted  in  the  Fourth  Open  Government  Action  Plan  for  Spain, 
approved on 29 October 2020.  

80   GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para. 50. 
81   Technical  Support  Instrument,  Commission  implementing  decision  on  the  financing  of  the  Technical 

Support Instrument and adoption of the work programme for 2021.  

82   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 7. 
83   2019-2023 Strategy against Organised Crime and Serious Crime.   
84   National Security Annual Report (2020), pp. 75-76. 
85   The Plan updates the 2018 Security Plan in order to guarantee the security conditions needed in Campo de 
Gibraltar  and  its  surrounding  areas,  and  respond  to  changes  in  the  modus  operandi  and  activities  of 
organized crime organizations due to the transnational environment in which they operate and their capacity 
to adapt. 

9 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
 
affected  territories  near  Campo  de  Gibraltar,  including  Malaga  and  Huelva86.  Despite  these 
developments,  the  implementation  of  the  strategy  has  suffered  some  delays  due  to  the 
COVID-19  pandemic,  and  it  is  expected  to  be  fully  implemented  within  the  existing 
timeframe and until 202387.  

Inadequate resources continue to be an obstacle to handle effectively high-level cases of 
corruption.  High-level  political  corruption,  fraud  involving  public  officials,  as  well  as 
economic  crimes  constitute  the  main  risks  of  serious  corruption  in  Spain88.  Many  of  these 
cases  have  been  pending  in  the  investigation  phase  for  several  years,  which  generates 
concern,  including  among  stakeholders89.  Stakeholders  have  reiterated  that  shortage  of 
adequate  funding  continues  to  be  an  obstacle  to  the  effective  handling  of  high-level 
corruption  cases90.  Moreover,  as  reported  by  the  Anti-Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office,  a 
shortage of specialised staff is the main obstacle in the proper management of complex cases 
(the  so-called  macro-cases),  which  often  involve  corruption  and  other  economic  crimes91. 
The  Anti-Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office’s  2019  annual  report  acknowledged  the  need  to 
increase  the  number  of  prosecutors,  currently  approved  in  nine  new  places92,  which  should 
alleviate  the  understaffed  situation  reported  in  previous  years93.  Currently,  the  Anti-
Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office  consists  of  29  prosecutors  and  145  personnel  in  total94. 
According to the data published by the General Council for the Judiciary, of all adjudicated 
cases of corruption crimes in 2020, 53 cases were convictions while 21 were acquittals95. 

The workload of the Council of Transparency and Good Governance has increased in 
the  last  year96,  while  resources  remain  insufficient  to  carry  out  all  its  activities97.  The 
Council’s  work  to  ensure  transparency,  public  access  to  information  and  good  governance 
has been challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic in addition to the persistent lack of human 
and financial resources98. With the appointment of a new President on 20 October 2020, the 

86   The  scope  of  the  Plan  has  been  extended  to  the  provinces  of  Malaga  and  Huelva  since  they  are  affected 
territories close to Campo de Gibraltar. The Plan strengthens the capacity of law enforcement authorities for 
these affected territories, including training and specialization of agents. 

87   National Security Annual Report (2020), pp. 75-76. 
88   Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (2020), Annual Report 2019, p. 704. 
89   Contribution from the Association of Prosecutors for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 13. 
90  Information received by the Association of Prosecutors in the context of the country visit to Spain. 
91   Anti-Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office  (2020),  Annual  Report  2019,  p.  706-710.  Only  in  2019,  the  Anti-
Corruption Prosecutor's Office processed a total of 72 investigation proceedings, intervened in 746 judicial 
procedures and issued 40 indictments.  

92   In April 2019, the Government strengthened the capacity of the Prosecutor’s Office with nine new places. 
93   Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (2020), Annual Report 2019, p. 698. 
94   Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (2020), Annual Report 2019, p. 701. 
95   Information obtained from the web-database of the Council for the Judiciary.   
96   The Council received 1338 claims in 2018, 1780 in 2019 and 1704 claims in 2020 (the decrease of claims is 
due to during the months of April and May, the system did not received claims due to the state of alarm). 
Information obtained from the web-database of the Council of Transparency and Good Governance.  

97  The Council has 24 staff and its initial budget for 2020 was EUR 2,28 million, the same as it was in 2019. 
The President of the Council stated that human resources are “clearly insufficient for the Council to manage 
efficiently  the  current  workload”.  Information  available  in  the  audio-visual  archive  of  the  Commission  on 
Territorial Policy and Public Function: Appearance of Mr. José Luis Rodríguez Álvarez, current President of 
the  Council  of  Transparency  and  Good  Governance,  Presentation  in  Parliament  of  2019  and  2020  Annual 
Reports (10 June 2021). 

98   Annual Report 2020, Council of Transparency and Good Governance, May 2021, p.25. 

10 

 
                                                 
Council expects to overcome difficulties encountered in its governance and address the issue 
of resources99. 

A reform of the integrity framework aims to consolidate rules on conflict of interest and 
incompatibilities in the public administration. The Fourth Open Government Plan100 (see 
also section IV) envisages amending the law on incompatibilities of staff employed by public 
administrations101  to  extend  the  regime  of  incompatibilities  and  prevention  of  conflicts  of 
interest to advisers and more effectively delimitate the system for the prevention of conflicts 
of interest and incompatibilities of public employees within all different administrations102. In 
addition,  the  Plan  aims  at  reinforcing  ethics  and  integrity  attached  to  the  use  of  artificial 
intelligence  in  the  activities  of  the  administration  in  order  to  maximise  data  management 
while  minimizing  integrity  risks103.  The  Office  of  Conflicts  of  Interest  (OCI)  continues 
overseeing the incompatibilities and conflicts of interest and monitors asset declarations for 
high-level  officials  and  members  of  Government104.  The  OCI  has  recently  introduced  an 
electronic  communication  system  to  enhance  the  efficient  management  of  documents  and 
information105.  This  system  entered  into  force  on  20  October  2020  and  requires  high-level 
officials and members of Government to communicate exclusively by electronic means with 
the OCI106.  

A  single  and  harmonised  code  of  conduct  is  now  applicable  to  all  members  of  the 
Congress  and  Senate.  In  line  with  GRECO’s  recommendation107,  on  1  October  2020,  the 
Parliament  approved  a  code  of  conduct  extending  rules  on  ethics,  transparency  and 
accountability to members of the Senate108. The code of conduct, which has already applied 

99   The  President  considered  the  lack  of  resources  a  main  challenge  to  be  addressed  in  his  presidency. 
Information  available  in  the    Commission  on  Territorial  Policy  and  Public  Function,  XIV  Legislature, 
Session  No  5:  Appearance  of  Mr.  José  Luis  Rodríguez  Álvarez,  current  President  of  the  Council  of 
Transparency and Good Governance (14 October 2020). On 28 January 2020, the Council published a new 
Evaluation  Plan  for  2021  to  provide  account  of  its  assessments  and  decided  to  publish  them  on  a  regular 
basis. On June 2021, the 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports were published.  

100  See also Section IV- Fourth Open Government Action Plan for Spain. (2020-2024).  
101  The  draft  law  will  amend  Law  53/1984,  of  26  December  1984;  and  the  adoption  is  expected  for  the  first 
semester  of  2022.  High-level  officials  and  members  of  Government  are  covered  under  Law  3/2015  of  30 
March 2015. 

102  This  includes  pulic  employees  at  national,  regional  and  local  levels.  High-level  officials  and  members  of 
Government,  are  covered  under  Law  3/2015  of  30  March  2015.  The  draft  law  was  opened  to  public 
consultation from April 28 to 28 May 2021 and will address, among others, a new system for the prevention 
of conflicts of interest and incompatibilities of public sector employees; the performance  of  new  forms of 
provision  of  professional  activities  not  covered  by  the  current  legislation;  new  regulation  of  activities 
exempted from the incompatibilities regime;  limitations on the performance of private activities in cases of 
administrative  situations  other  than  those  of  active  service;  and  a  new  and  more  rigorous  system  for  the 
prevention of conflicts of interest for non-permanent staff.  

103  Fourth Open Government Action Plan for Spain. (2020-2024), p. 82-83. This involves the preparation of a 
Guide for the use of artificial intelligence for the public sector that addresses ethical principles and proposes 
to  establish  the  Center  for  data  and  ethics  in  innovation  to  offer  recommendations,  advise  public 
administration and industry, and promote ethical responsibility.   

104  Input from Spain for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 21. 
105  Approval of Order TFP/350/2020, of 16 April amending Order TFP/2/2020 of 8 January 2006. 
106 The entry into force of this obligation was planned for 20 April 2020. However, it was delayed due to the 
COVID-19 pandemic in order to ensure that the electronic communication with the OCI is not disrupted by 
potential technical obstacles. 

107  GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round- Evaluation Report, p. 35. 
108  Agreement between the Boards of the Congress and the Senate on a code of conduct (2020).   

11 

 
                                                 
since 2019 to members of Congress, contains rules on declaration of activities and assets to 
prevent incompatibilities in the exercise of the duties as public representative109. In addition, 
the  new  Code  has  introduced  a  system  of  declaration  of  financial  interests,  and  requires 
members  of  Congress  and  Senators  to  publish  their  institutional  agendas,  including  their 
meetings  with  lobbyists110.  Since  October  2020,  there  are  control  mechanisms  in  place  to 
monitor the compliance with the Code, including the newly created Parliamentary Office for 
Conflicts of Interest headed by a legal counsellor from the Parliament111. The Parliamentary 
Office is in charge of solving doubts on the application of this Code112.  

Discussions  on  lobbying  legislation  are  ongoing  and  the  creation  of  a  transparency 
register  is  scheduled  for  2022.  To  date,  lobbying  is  not  regulated  in  Spain  at  national 
level113.  However,  the  definition  of  lobbyist  is  provided  under  the  Parliament  code  of 
conduct114. Under the various commitments made in the Fourth Open Government Plan, the 
regulation of lobbying, including the creation of a mandatory registry of lobbyists, is among 
the  priorities  to  boost  public  integrity115.  The  draft  law  was  opened  to  public  consultation 
from  28  April  to  28  May  2021;  and  is  expected  to  provide,  among  others,  a  definition  of 
interest  groups,  a  mandatory  register  for  interest  representatives  and  members,  as  well  as  a 
code of conduct governing the obligations of members and lobbyists. In addition, a system of 
penalties  and  revolving  door  limitations  between  senior  officials  and  public  employees  is 
expected to be issued116. The Office of Conflicts of Interest is expected to be in charge of the 
management  of  the  transparency  register.  The  draft  is  expected  to  be  finalised  by  October 
2021  and  approved  by  the  Government  in  the  spring  of  2022  before  being  tabled  in  the 
Parliament117. 

The  preparation  of  a  whistleblower  protection  framework  is  ongoing.  As  reported  last 
year,  Spain  lacks  a  general  whistleblower  protection  framework,  despite  some  sectorial 
regulation118. In June 2020, a working group of the General Codification Commission for the 
Transposition  of  Directive  (EU)  2019/1937  was  established119.  The  public  consultation 
opened  until  27  January  20210  collected  more  than  40  views  from  civil  society  and 
individuals on several regulatory issues120. These contributions are being taken into account 
in the preparation of the first draft law, which will also be subjected to a public hearing. The 

109  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 8. 
110  Art. 6(2) Code of Conduct of the Congress and Senate. 
111  Written contribution received by the Office of International Relations of the Congress in the context of the 

country visit to Spain. 

112  Art. 8 Code of Conduct of the Congress and Senate. 
113  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 8. 
114  Art. 6(2) code of conduct of the Congress and Senate.  
115  Fourth Open Government Action Plan for Spain (2020-2024). 
116  Prior  public  consultation  on  the  “Draft  Law  on  Transparency  and  Integrity  in  the  Activities  of  Interest 

Groups”.  

117  Information received by Ministry of Interior in the context of the country visit to Spain. 
118 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, p. 8. 
119  Order  of  2  June  2020,  setting  up  a  working  group  of  the  General  Codification  Commission  for  the 
Transposition  of  Directive  (EU)  2019/1937  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  23  October 
2019, concerning the protection of persons reporting on breaches of the EU law.  

120 Public Consultation on the Transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1937.  

12 

 
                                                 
protection  of  whistle-blowers  is  also  under  the  priorities  of  the  Fourth  Open  Government 
Plan121.  

The  COVID-19  pandemic  has  affected  the  mechanisms  in  place  to  fight  corruption. 
Following the declaration of the state of alarm122, the procedures in place to ensure access to 
public  information  were  suspended,  but  internal  actions  were  carried  out  to  organize  the 
procedure  for  resolving  the  requests  for  access  to  public  information123.  The  Council  of 
Transparency and Good Governance has received an increased number of claims requesting 
access  to  information  in  the  context  of  COVID-19  support  measures124,  including  on 
corruption and fraud. The Independent Office for Regulation and Supervision of Procurement 
(OIReScon), which verifies best practices on transparency and identifies irregularities, issued 
a report assessing the effects  of COVID-19 in  public procurement  with  particular  regard to 
publicity  and  transparency125.  This  report  highlighted  that  COVID-19  has  led  to  the  urgent 
implementation  of  electronic  channels  to  enable  communication,  including  in  the  sector  of 
procurement  with  the  increased  use  of  the  system  of  electronic  contracting126.  Spain 
improved  online  systems  for  the  prevention  and  reporting  of  corruption,  which  is  of  great 
importance  in  this  particular  sector  where  the  majority  of  corruption  and  fraud  related 
complaints are reported via electronic platforms127. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

The  Constitution  enshrines  the  rights  to  freedom  of  expression  and  media  freedom128.  In 
addition,  Spain  has  a  comprehensive  legal  framework  for  ensuring  media  pluralism129.  An 
independent  multi-regulatory  body,  the  National  Commission  for  Markets  and  Competition 
(CNMC),  assumes  the  role  of  audio-visual  regulator.  The  process  to  transpose  the  revised 
Audio-Visual  Media  Services  Directive  (AVMSD)  into  Spanish  law  was  started  by  the 
Ministry for Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation (MAETD) with the publication of 
a Draft Law on Audiovisual Communication130 that was subject to a public consultation until 
December 2020.  

The Audiovisual Regulator has raised some concerns on its independence and resources 
in the context of the transposition of the AVMSD. While the CNMC will assume the new 
competences  and  tasks  stemming  from  the  revised  AVMSD  with  the  ensuing  increased 
workload, the explanatory statement to the Draft Law on Audiovisual Communication does 

121 Fourth Open Government Action Plan for Spain (2020-2024).  
122The first state of alarm was declared on 13 March 2020; the second state of alarm on 9 October 2020; and the 

third state of alarm on 25 October 2020. 

123 Council of Transparency and Good Governance, Annual Report 2020 (May 2021). 
124 Information obtained from the web-database of the Council of Transparency and Good Governance. 
125 -Independent Office for the Regulation and Supervision of procurement 2020, Annual report of monitoring of 

the public procurement in Spain (December 2020), p. 394.  

126 Emergency measures to support the sector cultural and tax nature to face the economic and social impact of 

the COVID-2019, have been extended also to area of public procurement matters. 

127 Electronic platforms include open mailbox applications and e-mail. In 2019, 63% of complaints of corruption 
in  public  procurement  sector  were  lodged  via  open  mailbox.  -Independent  Office  for  the  Regulation  and 
Supervision  of  procurement  2020,  Annual  report  of  monitoring  of  the  public  procurement  in  Spain 
(December 2020), p. 406.  

128 Art. 20 of the Spanish Constitution. 
129 Spain ranks 29th in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) thus 

remaining in the same position as in 2020. Spain comes 15th among the EU Member States. 

130 Anteproyecto de Ley (APL) General de Comunicación Audiovisual. 

13 

 
                                                 
not  consider  a  staff  increase  necessary.  The  Audiovisual  Sub-Directorate  of  the  CNMC  is 
considered  understaffed  in  comparison  to  the  equivalent  bodies  in  other  EU  Member 
States131. During the public consultation on the draft law, the CNMC presented an opinion132 
that, while giving a positive assessment of the draft law, states that it lacks clarity on some 
key issues and raises a number of concerns. In particular, according to the CNMC, the draft 
law does not address the ‘adequacy of resources’ requirement established in the AVMSD133. 
In  addition,  its  operational  independence  appears  to  be  restricted,  as,  according  to  the  draft 
law,  the  Government  will  remain  in  charge  of  certain  decisions  regarding  the  internal 
organisation and functioning of the CNMC (e.g. on recruitment, salaries, staff numbers). The 
CNMC  also  considers  that  the  draft  law  could  establish  additional  provisions  in  relation  to 
media pluralism134.   

The  transparency  of  media  ownership  remains  a  challenge135.  As  referred  in  the  2020 
Rule of  Law Report136, ownership data is  publicly  accessible, but  ownership information  is 
not exhaustive (provided only for radio and television) and there are difficulties to assess who 
exactly  is  behind  each  company.  There  have  been  no  new  legal  developments  in  this  area. 
Spain has a National Registry of Audiovisual Communication Service Providers, which can 
be  accessed  freely  by  the  public  and  contains  information  on  owners  with  significant 
participation in  the capital  of service providers.  Nevertheless,  the Media Pluralism  Monitor 
(MPM  2021)  Report  for  Spain137  considers  there  is  a  high  risk  for  transparency  of  media 
ownership,  pointing  to  the  lack  of  rules  for  digital  media.  News  media  concentration  is 
reported as high in Spain138. 

Shortcomings have been identified in relation to procurement contracts on institutional 
advertising.  Legislative  provisions  regulate  the  contracting  of  state  advertising  and 
institutional campaigns139. A recent study conducted on behalf of a professional association140 
analysed a sample of contracts representing about 12% of the total number of contracts and 
almost 50% in their value. The study pointed to a number of shortcomings in the drafting of 
terms of reference of a large majority of the analysed procurement contracts on institutional 

131  Written  contribution  received  by  National  Commission  for  Markets  and  Competition  in  the  context  of  the 

country visit to Spain. 

132 National  Commission for Markets and Competition 2020,  Acuerdo por el que se emite  informe  relativo al 

Anteproyecto de Ley General de Comunicación Audiovisual IPN/CNMC/042/20. 

133 Art. 30.4 AVMSD: “Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities or bodies have adequate 
financial  and  human  resources  and  enforcement  powers  to  carry  out  their  functions  effectively  and  to 
contribute to the work of ERGA. Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities or bodies 
are provided with their own annual budgets, which shall be made public”. 

134 National  Commission for Markets and Competition 2020,  Acuerdo por el que se emite  informe  relativo al 

Anteproyecto de Ley General de Comunicación Audiovisual IPN/CNMC/042/20. 

135 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain, pp. 9-10. 
136  Ibid. 
137 2021 Media Pluralism Monitor country report for Spain, p. 7. 
138  The  Top  4  TV  media  have  79%  of  audience,  and  the  two  main  TV  companies  account  for  80.5%  of 
advertising revenue. In radio, the Top 4 media have 75% of audience, and in newspapers, the Top 4 media 
have 91% of audience. In the digital sector the concentration is lower, with 53% of the audience for 4 Top 
media. However, the lack of available data of news media operating in the digital realm is an issue. See 2021 
Media Pluralism Monitor country report for Spain, pp. 10 and 15. 

139 Law No. 29/2005 of 29 December, on Institutional Advertising and Communication, and Royal Decree No. 

947/2006.  

140  FEDE  (Federación  de  Empresas  de  Publicidad  y  Comunicación)  2021,  Más  del  90%  de  los  concursos 

públicos de publicidad presenta irregularidades en sus pliegos de licitación 14 April 2021. 

14 

 
                                                 
advertising. In a similar vein, the MPM 2021 reflects that complaints are common regarding 
the  unfair  distribution  of  public  expenditures  depending  on  the  ideological  alignment  of 
digital news media141.  

The  media  sector  has  been  highly  impacted  by  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  the 
Government  has  adopted  some  media-specific  support  measures.  In  2020,  the  media 
income decreased more than the GDP, challenging media viability. The main reason of this 
decrease  was  the  reduction  in  advertising  income,  which  in  overall  terms  fell  17.9%;  print 
media  was  the  most  affected,  with  a  drop  in  advertising  turnover  of  30.8%,  while  digital 
media  had  a  decrease  of  5.3%142.  The  pandemic  has  also  had  a  negative  impact  on  the 
journalistic  profession,  as  numerous  media  companies  began  to  present  temporary 
employment regulation files or proposed salary reductions143. Freelance journalists were the 
most  affected144.  The  Government  has  taken  certain  measures  to  support  the  media  sector, 
such as the reduction in VAT on digital media (from 21% to 4%)145 and a temporary financial 
support framework, where EUR 15 million were earmarked for state-wide digital  terrestrial 
television channels146.  

The  Government  is  taking  steps  to  address  concerns  by  stakeholders  about  access  to 
information. While there were critics of the system put in place by the Secretary of State for 
Communication for press conferences at the start of the pandemic, the situation was rapidly 
addressed to allow journalists to ask questions in a hybrid (online and physical) mode. The 
Government  has  also  set  up  a  commission147  formed  by  the  Ministries  of  the  Presidency, 
Defense,  Home  Affairs  and  Foreign  Affairs  to  revise  the  Law  on  Official  Secrets148  (that 
dates from the pre-constitution times) in order to make access to official information easier 
for journalists and the general public149. 

Journalists  have  continued  to  face  challenges  in  their  professional  activities150.  There 
have been no changes in the regulatory framework151 concerning journalists. Nevertheless, on 
11  December  2020,  an  Agreement  was  signed  between  the  Ministry  of  Home  Affairs,  the 
Federation of Associations of Journalists of Spain, and the National Association of Graphic 
Press  and  Television  Informants,  with  the  main  purpose  of  facilitating  the  work  of 
information  professionals  in  places  and  events  where  situations  of  violence  may  occur152. 
Concerns  remain  about  the  negative  impact  for  journalists  of  the  Citizen  Security  Law153,, 
particularly on photojournalists154 (see also section IV). Furthermore, the Council of Europe´s 

141  2021 Media Pluralism Monitor country report for Spain, p.16. 
142  Infoadex (2021). Informe Infoadex de la inversión publicitaria en España 2021. 
143  PRnoticias (2020) EPA: El periodismo se desploma con 11.400 empleos menos en el último trimestre. 
144  APM (2020) Los periodistas autónomos, los más perjudicados del sector por el impacto de la COVID-19. 
145  2021 Media Pluralism Monitor country report for Spain, p.10. 
146  Art. 46 of Royal Decree11/2020, adopting urgent social and economic measures to face COVID-19.  
147 Information received by Ministry of the Presidency in the context of the country visit to Spain. 
148  Law 9/1968, of 5 April, on official secrets. 
149  According  to  the  Government,  the  new  law  will  be  based  on  the  principles  of  transparency  and  publicity, 

efficiency of administrative action, security, information assurance and proportionality. 
150  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain p. 10. 
151  Organic Law 1/2015, Organic Law 2/2015 and Organic Law 4/2015.  
152  Ministry  of  Home  Affairs  2021,  Interior,  la  FAPE  y  la  ANIGP-TV  mejoran  la  identificación  de  los 

informadores en eventos que requieran de la intervención policial.  

153  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Spain p. 10. 
154 Contribution from ENNHRI for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, pp. 345-346. 

15 

 
                                                 
Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists has registered four 
alerts for Spain in 2021, all related to violence towards journalists and/or their equipment155. 
Since  the  2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  there  have  been  several  instances  of  political  parties 
banning  certain  media/journalists  from  their  press  conferences,  or  publicly  attacking  media 
outlets  that  do  not  share  their  views156.  Harassment  of  journalists  on  social  media  is  an 
increasing, worrying phenomenon157.  

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Spain is a parliamentary monarchy, with a bicameral Parliament (‘Cortes Generales’)158. It is 
also  a  decentralised  unitary  state  where  the  State  and  the  Autonomous  Regions  have  both 
exclusive  and  shared  competences159.  The  Constitutional  Court  is  competent  to  review  the 
constitutionality of laws. Both chambers of the Parliament  – the Congress and the Senate – 
have legislative competence, which they can delegate to the Government, subject to  certain 
limitations160. The Government, the two Chambers of the  Parliament, the  assemblies of the 
autonomous  regions,  and  a  group  of  at  least  500  000  citizens  have  the  right  of  legislative 
initiative.  

The Government has approved a new Fourth Open Government Plan (2020-2024). The 
Plan161 was approved in October 2020 jointly by the national, regional and local governments 
and  following  a  consultative  process,  including  the  organisation  of  workshops  and  other 
participatory activities. It aims to strengthen the links between citizens and public authorities, 
as  well  as  increasing  citizen  involvement  in  the  development  of  public  policies.  It  sets  ten 
new  commitments  in  relation  to  transparency,  accountability,  public  participation,  public 
integrity  and  awareness  on  citizen  participation  in  policy-making.  These  commitments 
include  the  transposition  of  the  Directive  on  open  data  and  the  re-use  of  public  sector 
information162.  The  Plan  includes  110  initiatives  and  529  activities;  to  date 17%  have  been 
finalised,  38%  are  ongoing  and  43%  are  still  pending163.  The  ‘Open  Government  Forum’, 

155 Two of these cases concerned actions of riot police during demonstrations (Valencia and Girona), and two 
others related to physical violence against a journalist and destruction of equipment of a broadcaster. One of 
the alerts - regarding the actions of riot police in Valencia - has been addressed by Spanish authorities. See 
Council  of  Europe:  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists 
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/media-freedom/spain). 

156  Information received by Associations of journalists in the context of the country visit. 
157  2021 Media Pluralism Monitor country report for Spain, p.15.  
158  It consists of the Congress of Deputies (the lower house), and the Senate (the upper house). Both are directly 

elected. 

159  Autonomous Regions have political and financial autonomy, having an institutional organisation based on a 
Legislative  Assembly,  a  Governing  Council  with  executive  and  administrative  functions  and  a  President, 
elected by the Assembly from among its members. Autonomous Regions hold the power to pass laws on a 
wide  range  of  areas  over  which  they  have  exclusive  competence,  but  also  secondary  legislation  in  certain 
matters that are competence of the State, as well as the execution of State regulations. 

160  Art. 82 of the Spanish Constitution.  
161  Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration (2020),  IV Plan abierto de gobierno (2020-2024), 

29 October 2020. 

162  Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and 

the re-use of public sector information.  

163  Information available in the website of the Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration. 

16 

 
                                                 
composed  of  representatives  of  public  administrations  and  civil  society,  has  continued  its 
operations and on 29 October 2020, it approved its rules of internal procedure164.  

The  Autonomous  Regions  were  designated  as  competent  authorities  for  the 
implementation  of  the  emergency  measures  adopted  in  the  context  of  the  COVID-19 
pandemic.  In  2020,  the  Government  declared  a  state  of  alarm  on  three  different 
occasions165.The  second  state  of  alarm166  was  limited  to  a  number  of  municipalities  of  the 
Autonomous Region of Madrid during 15 days. The third state of alarm167 was approved by 
the Congress and extended to 9 May 2021. This was less restrictive in comparison to the first 
state of alarm and designated the Autonomous Governments as competent authorities for the 
implementation of the emergency measures. The Parliament has remained in session during 
the  pandemic,  and  it  has  continued  exercising  its  control  of  the  emergency  measures.  The 
Minister  of  Health  has  provided  information  on  adopted  and  implemented  measures  to  the 
Parliamentary Commission on Health and Consumption every 15 days. On 14 July 2021, the 
Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional some provisions of the Royal Decree declaring 
the  first  state  of  alarm  in  relation  to  limitations  to  the  freedom  of  movement168.  The 
Constitutional Court is also currently examining another  complaint in relation to the second 
state of alarm169, as well as several individual constitutional appeals in relation to the right of 
assembly in the context of the pandemic. Stakeholders170 have claimed that the repeated use 
by the Government of the power granted by the Constitution to legislate via decree-laws in 
cases of extraordinary and urgent necessity171 would limit the involvement of stakeholders in 
the legislative procedure. Once the state of alarm ended on 9 May 2021, the law provides that 
measures taken by Autonomous Regions restricting fundamental rights would need to have a 
prior  judicial  authorisation  in  the  form  of  a  court  order.  On  4  May  2021,  the  Government 

164  Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration (2020), Acuerdo del Foro de Gobierno Abierto por 
el  que  se  modifican  sus  normas  complementarias  de  funcionamiento  y  se  prorroga  transitoriamente  el 
mandato  de  los  vocales  de  la  comisión  permanente  y  de  la  vicepresidencia  segunda  del  foro,  29  October 
2020. 

165  Art. 116(2) of the Spanish Constitution and Arts. 6 and 8 of the Organic Law No. 4/1981, of 1 June 1981. 
The state of alarm is the least severe of the three possible states of emergency provided for in the Spanish 
Constitution. It does not suspend the general application of the fundamental rights set out in the Constitution, 
although some specific freedoms may be restricted. The first state of alarm was declared on 13 March 2020; 
the  second  state  of  alarm  on  9  October  2020;  and  the  third  state  of  alarm  on  25  October  2020.  The 
Constitution also confers on the Government the right to legislate via decree-laws in cases of extraordinary 
and urgent need, and within a defined material scope. The Government is subject to the obligation to present 
such  a  decree-law  to  the  Congress,  the  latter  having  the  prerogative  to  derogate  from  it.  For  more 
information on the  first state  of alarm, see 2020 Rule of  Law Report,  Country  Chapter  on the rule of law 
situation in Spain.  

166  Royal Decree 900/2020, of 9 October, declaring the state of alarm to response to specific risk situations of 

the non-controlled transmission of infections caused by the SARS-CoV-2. 

167  Royal  Decree  926/2020,  of  25  October,  declaring  the  state  of  alarm  to  contain  the  spread  of  infections 

caused by the SARS-CoV-2. 

168  Constitutional Court, Informative note No. 72/2021. 
169  Constitutional complaint No. 5342-2020. 
170  Information received in the context of the country visit to Spain. In this context, see also Ruling 110/2021, of 
13  of  May  2021  of  the  Constitutional  Court,  which  declared  unconstitutional  a  provision  of  the  Royal 
Decree-Law  8/2020  of  17  March  regulating  measures  to  deal  with  the  economic  and  social  impact  of  the 
COVID-19  pandemic,  as  it  considered  that  the  requirements  that  allowed  the  Government  to  avoid  the 
ordinary  legislative procedure in Parliament and directly  use the  fast-track route of the  Royal decree  were 
not met.  

171  Art. 86 of the Spanish Constitution. 

17 

 
                                                 
adopted a Royal Decree Law172 setting out a procedure allowing the Administrative Chamber 
of the Supreme Court to review these court orders, in order to ensure uniform application of 
the caseload throughout the whole national territory.  

The  Ombudsperson  reviewed  a  significantly  greater  volume  of  complaints  since  the 
beginning of the pandemic. The Ombudsperson (‘Defensor del Pueblo’), which is the High 
Commissioner of Parliament responsible for defending citizens’ fundamental rights and civil 
liberties  by  monitoring  the  activity  of  the  public  administration  and  public  authorities173,  is 
also the National Human Rights Institution in Spain. The Ombudsperson is appointed by the 
Parliament174. Negotiations between political parties for their appointment are still ongoing, 
thus the Ombudsperson has remained in  function  ad interim since 2017, when the previous 
term of office expired175. The number of complaints received by the Ombudsperson increased 
significantly in 2020: it received 28 028 complaints (from 20 215 in 2019) and 909 requests 
to  interpose  constitutional  reviews  to  the  Constitutional  Court  (from  135  in  2019)176.  The 
most  common  complaints  are  related  to  the  emergency  measures  taken  in  the  context  of 
COVID-19,  delays  in  the  administration  of  justice,  employment,  social  security,  and 
migration.  In addition, the Ombudsperson has had an active role during the pandemic, as it 
has  carried  out  406  ex  officio  actions,  including  recommendations  on  the  situation  of  jail 
prisoners, the arrival of migrants to the Canary Islands, and the closure of detentions centres 
for migrants while borders were temporarily closed177.  

The space for civil society organisations in Spain is facing challenges, and a revision of 
the  Citizen  Security  Law  is  ongoing.  Civil  society  space  is  considered  to  be  narrowed178. 
Civil  society  organisations  faced  several  challenges  in  relation  to  access  to  funding. 
Stakeholders have reported funding cuts by several public authorities in 2020179 despite the 
increased needs posed by the outbreak of the pandemic. In addition, the 2015 Law on Citizen 
Security180, that according to its preamble aims to protect people and property and maintain 
the  public  peace  through  the  regulation  of  police  interventions  and  other  matters,  raised 
concerns from stakeholders181. In November 2020 and January 2021, the Constitutional Court 
issued two judgements on the law182, concluding that most of its provisions are constitutional, 
if  interpreted  in  good  faith  and  with  due  regard  to  the  principles  enumerated  in  the  law,  in 
particular  as  regards  the  principles  of  proportionality,  non-discrimination,  efficiency,  and 

172 Royal Decree Law 8/2021, of 4 May. 
173  Art. 54 of the Spanish Constitution. 
174 Art. 2 of the Organic Law No. 3/1981. 
175  Art.  11  of  the  Organic  Law  No.  3/1981  provides  that  the  functions  of  the  Ombudsperson  shall  not  be 

interrupted due to the expiration of their mandate.  
176  Defensor del Pueblo (2021), Informe anual 2020. 
177 This recommendation was followed by the authorities.  
178  Rating by CIVICUS; ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed 

and closed. 

179  European  Anti  Poverty  Network  (EAPN)  (2020),  Denuncian  la  decisión  de  recortar  la  financiación  a  las 

ONG estatales de Acción Social en plena pandemia.  

180  Organic Law 4/2015.  
181  Concerns were related to, among others, offences in the context of meetings and demonstrations, and the use 

of images or data by the police. Contribution from ENNHRII for the 2021 Rule of Law Report.   

182  Decision of the Constitutional Court 172/2020, of 19 November related to constitutional complaint No 2896-
2015; and Decision of the Constitutional Court 13/2021, of 28 January related to constitutional complaint No 
3848-2015.  

18 

 
                                                 
respect  for  rights  and  freedoms183.  Nonetheless,  one  provision  of  the  law  was  declared 
unconstitutional  in  relation  to  the  prohibition  of the  “unauthorised”  use  of  photo  and  video 
images  of  police  officers  at  duty  or  in  a  private  setting184.  In  March  2021,  the  Venice 
Commission issued an opinion on the law185, highlighting that even in cases when a norm is 
considered  to  be  constitutionally  acceptable,  if  in  practice  it  has  led  to  abuses  it  should  be 
changed,  circumscribed,  or  accompanied  by  additional  safeguards.  The  opinion  encouraged 
the Spanish legislator to carry out an in-depth assessment of the practical operation of the law 
and its impact on fundamental rights and freedoms. The law is currently being revised by the 
Parliament, and it is important that this opinion is taken into account. Stakeholders have also 
reported  that  in  April  2021,  there  were  sporadic  attacks  by  far-right  extremists  to  the  head 
offices of a number of NGOs in connection to LGTBI rights and migration186.  

There have been several initiatives aimed to foster a rule of law culture. The Council for 
the Judiciary develops and implements the "Educating in Justice" programme launched at the 
end  of  2019,  aimed  at  secondary  school  students,  so  that  students  acquire  sufficient 
knowledge  about  the  functioning  of  the  justice  system  in  Spain,  with  special  emphasis  on 
aspects  such  as  gender  violence  and  the  criminal  liability  of  minors187.  Within  the 
programme, judges provide talks to students, school visits are organised to courts and other 
institutions, and mock trials are carried out with the support of their teachers.  

183 Art. 4 of the Organic Law 4/2015. 
184  The  Constitutional  Court  held  that  the  reference  to  “unauthorised”  images  implies  the  need  for  an 
authorisation, which is a form of censorship. The Court established that the taking of such pictures cannot be 
limited,  while their use  –  which  may endanger protected interests  –  may be lawfully restricted. Therefore, 
the Court ruled that the reference to the “unauthorised” use of the pictures should be excluded from the law. 

185  Venice Commission (CDL-AD(2021)004). 
186  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Spain;  and  El  Mundo  La  sede  de  COGAM 
amanece  vandalizada  con  mensajes  tránsfobos  3  April  2021;  El  Diario  Atacadas  las  sedes  del  colectivo 
Lambda y de una ONG africana en Valencia 13 April 2021. 

187  Written contribution received by the Council for the Judiciary in the context of the country visit to Spain 

19 

 
                                                 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2021 Rule of Law report 
can  be 
found  at  https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-
law/rule-law/rule-law-mechanism/2021-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation. 

Anti-Corruption prosecutor’s Office (2020), Annual Report 2019. 

Association Impulso Ciudadano (2021), Contribution from the Association Impulso Ciudadano for the 
2021 Rule of Law Report. 

Association  of  Prosecutors  (2021),  Contribution  from  the  Association  of  Prosecutors  for  the  2021 
Rule of Law Report. 

Association  of  Prosecutors  (2021),  Alegaciones  que  presenta  la  Asociación  de  Fiscales  al 
(LECRIM) 
Ley 
Anteproyecto 
(http://www.asociaciondefiscales.es/index.php/general1/itemlist/date/2021/3). 

Enjuiciamiento 

Criminal 

de 

de 

la 

Center for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2020), The Media Pluralism Monitor 2020. 

CEPEJ (2020), Study on the functioning of the judicial systems in the EU Member States. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Spain. 

Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2021), EU 2020: Demanding on democracy. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2000), Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to 
member  States  on  the  freedom  of  exercise  of  the  profession  of  lawyer  (Recommendation  No. 
R(2000)21) (https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016804d0fc8). 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee  of  Ministers  to  member  states  on  judges:  independence,  efficiency  and  responsibilities 
(https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805afb78). 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2021). Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the 
Council of Europe on the efficiency and the effectiveness of legal aid schemes in the areas of civil and 
administrative 
(CM(2021)36) 
law 
(https://search.coe.int/cm/pages/result_details.aspx?objectid=0900001680a1a347). 

Council of Europe: Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) (2007), Opinion no.10(2007)to 
the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the Council for the Judiciary 
at the service of society (https://rm.coe.int/168074779b). 

Council of Europe: Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) (2020), Opinion No. 23 on the 
role 
independence 
in 
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/ccje/opinion-no.-23-on-the-role-of-judicial-associations-2020-). 

the  Associations 

supporting 

judicial 

Judges 

the 

of 

of 

Council of Europe: Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2021), 
Countries: Spain (https://www.coe.int/en/web/media-freedom/spain). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2010), Report on the role of the opposition in a democratic 
(https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/CDL-
parliament 
AD(2010)025.aspx). 

(CDL-AD(2010)025) 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2018),  Montenegro  -  Opinion  on  the  draft  law  on 
(CDL-AD(2018)015-f) 
amendments 
(https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdf=CDL-AD(2018)015-
f&lang=EN). 

the  Judicial  Council  and  Judges 

law  on 

the 

to 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2019),  Parameters  on  the  Relationship  between  the 
Parliamentary  Majority  and  the  Opposition  in  a  Democracy:  a  checklist  (CDL-AD(2019)015-e) 
(https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2019)015-e). 

20 

 
Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2021),  Spain-Opinion  on  the  Citizens’  Security  Law, 
adopted  by 
its  126th  plenary  session  (CDL-AD(2021)004-e) 
(https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2021)004-e ). 

the  Venice  Commission  at 

for 

the 

Judiciary-  Metroscopia 

Council 
los 
(https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Temas/Transparencia/Buen-Gobierno--Codigo-etico-y-
Comision-de-Etica-Judicial/Encuestas-de-satisfaccion/Encuesta-realizada-por-Metroscopia-a-la-
Carrera-Judicial--Octubre-2020-). 

(2020),  La 

vista  por 

justicia 

jueces 

Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open 
data and the re-use of public sector information. 

Directive  (EU)  2019/1153  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  June  2019  laying 
down  rules  facilitating  the  use  of  financial  and  other  information  for  the  prevention,  detection, 
investigation  or  prosecution  of  certain  criminal  offences,  and  repealing  Council  Decision 
2000/642/JHA. 

El  Diario  (2021),  Atacadas  las  sedes  del  colectivo  Lambda  y  de  una  ONG  africana  en  Valencia 
(https://www.eldiario.es/comunitat-valenciana/atacadas-sedes-colectivo-lambda-ong-africana-
valencia_1_7801536.html). 

El Mundo (2021a), La sede de Cogam amanece vandalizada con mensajes tránsfobos– 3 April 2021– 
(https://www.elmundo.es/madrid/2021/04/03/60684e8d21efa01e1a8b45f1.html). 

El Mundo (2021b), Más de 2.500 jueces se dirigen a la Comisión Europea para alertar del "riesgo 
grave 
2021– 
de  Derecho" 
(https://www.elmundo.es/espana/2021/04/12/607420c7fdddff671d8b45fa.html). 

en  España– 

del  Estado 

12  April 

violación 

de 

Europapress  (2021),  Los  jueces  achacan  el  giro  de  Moncloa  de  retirar  la  reforma  del  CGPJ  a  la 
"presión" 
2021 
(https://www.europapress.es/nacional/noticia-jueces-acogen-satisfaccion-retirada-reforma-cgpj-
cambiar-mayorias-urgen-renovar-20210421142512.html).  

ejercida 

"toque" 

Europa 

April 

21 

de 

el 

– 

y 

European Anti Poverty Network (EAPN) (2020), Denuncian la decisión de recortar la financiación a 
pandemia 
las 
(https://www.eapn.es/covid19/noticia/36/denuncian-la-decision-de-recortar-la-financiacion-a-las-ong-
estatales-de-accion-social-en-plena-pandemia). 

estatales 

Acción 

Social 

plena 

ONG 

de 

en 

European  Association  of  Judges  (2020),  EAJ  statement  about  Spain–  13  October  2020– 
(http://www.iaj-uim.org/news/eaj-statement-about-spain/). 

European  Commission  (2019),  European  Semester:  Country  Report  Spain  2019  -  Including  an  In-
Depth  Review  on  the  prevention  and  correction  of  macroeconomic  imbalances,  SWD(2019)  1008 
final  (https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/file_import/2019-european-semester-country-report-
spain_en.pdf). 

European  Commission  (2020),  Rule  of  Law  report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  of 
Spain 
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?qid=1602579986149&uri=CELEX%3A52020SC0308). 

European Commission (2021), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European  Network  of  National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (ENNHRI)  (2021),  Contribution  from 
ENNHRI for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. 

General  Council  of  Spanish  Lawyers  (2021),  Contribution  from  the  General  Council  of  Spanish 
Lawyers for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. 

GRECO  (2019),  Fourth  Evaluation  Round  –  Corruption  prevention  in  respect  of  members  of 
parliament, judges and prosecutors (GrecoRC4(2019)12) (https://rm.coe.int/fourth-evaluation-round-
corruption-prevention-in-respect-of-members-of/168098c67d). 

21 

 
GRECO (2019), Fifth Evaluation Round – Preventing corruption and promoting integrity in central 
Governments  (top  executive  functions)  and  law  enforcement  agencies  (GrecoEval5Rep(2018)5) 
(https://rm.coe.int/fifth-evaluation-round-preventing-corruption-and-promoting-integrity-
i/168098c691). 

GRECO 
Delegation 
to 
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-rule-of-law/-/spain-letter-to-the-greco-head-of-delegation). 

GRECO 

(2020), 

Letter 

Spain 

Head 

the 

of 

- 

CGPJ 

High Court of Castilla y León (2020), Press Release- El TSJCyL rechaza la propuesta de renovación 
2020– 
del 
(https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Tribunales-Superiores-de-Justicia/TSJ-Castilla-
y-Leon/Sala-de-prensa/Archivo-de-notas-de-prensa/El-TSJCyL-rechaza-la-propuesta-de-renovacion-
del-CGPJ-presentada-por-PSOE-y-Podemos). 

presentada 

Podemos– 

October 

PSOE 

por 

19 

y 

High  Court  of  Madrid  (2020),  Press  Release-  La  Sala  de  Gobierno  del  TSJ  de  Madrid  muestra  su 
profunda  preocupación  ante  la  iniciativa  de  reforma  de  la  Ley  Orgánica  del  Poder  Judicial–  19 
October 
(https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Tribunales-Superiores-de-
Justicia/TSJ-Madrid/Sala-de-prensa/Archivo-de-notas-de-prensa/La-Sala-de-Gobierno-del-TSJ-de-
Madrid-muestra-su-profunda-preocupacion-ante-la-iniciativa-de-reforma-de-la-Ley-Organica-del-
Poder-Judicial). 

2020– 

High Court of Andalucía, Ceuta and Melilla (2020), Press Release- El pleno de la Sala de Gobierno 
del  TSJA  se  pronuncia  sobre  el  proyecto  de  reforma  del  CGPJ–  20  October  2020– 
(https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Tribunales-Superiores-de-Justicia/TSJ-
Andalucia--Ceuta-y-Melilla/Sala-de-prensa/Archivo-de-notas-de-prensa/El-pleno-de-la-Sala-de-
Gobierno-del-TSJA-se-pronuncia-sobre-el-proyecto-de-reforma-del-CGPJ). 

Independent Judicial Forum (2021), Contribution from the Independent Judicial Forum for the 2021 
Rule of Law Report. 

Infoadex (2021). Informe Infoadex de la inversión publicitaria en España 2021. 

Judges and Magistrates’ Association “Francisco de Vitoria”(2021), Contribution from the Judges and 
Magistrates’ Association “Francisco de Vitoria” for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. 

Juezas 
(https://twitter.com/JpDemocracia/status/1384409552117014531)  

la  Democracia 

Jueces 

(2021),  Comment 

por 

y 

on 

20  April 

2021 

Minister  of  Justice  (2021),  Campo:  “La  nueva  Ley  de  Eficiencia  Organizativa  profundiza  en  la 
democracia 
interna  del  Poder  Judicial”(  https://www.mjusticia.gob.es/es/ministerio/gabinete-
comunicacion/noticias-ministerio/210420-ley-de-eficiencia-organizativa). 

Ministry  of  Economy  and  Finance  2020,  Annual report  of  monitoring  of  the  public  procurement in 
Spain, December 2020 

Ministry of Home Affairs (2021), Interior, la FAPE y la ANIGP-TV mejoran la identificación de los 
informadores en eventos que requieran de la intervención policial. 

Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration (2020), IV Plan abierto de gobierno (2020-
2024)– 
2020– 
(https://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/planes-
accion.html). 

October 

29 

Security 

National 
(https://www.dsn.gob.es/ca/documento/informe-anual-seguridad-nacional-2020). 
OECD (2015),  Spain: follow-up to the phase 3 report  & recommendations (Spain-Phase-3-Written-
Follow-Up-Report-EN.pdf (oecd.org)). 

Department 

(2021), 

Annual 

Report 

2020 

22 

 
 
 
Ombudsperson  (2021),  Annual  Report  2020  (https://www.defensordelpueblo.es/noticias/informe-
anual-2020/). 

Press Association of Madrid (2020), Los periodistas autónomos, los más perjudicados del sector por 
el impacto de la  COVID-19– 3 June 2020–(https://www.apmadrid.es/los-periodistas-autonomos-los-
mas-perjudicados-del-sector-por-el-impacto-de-la-covid-19/ ). 

Prnoticias (2020), EPA: El periodismo se desploma con 11.400 empleos menos en el último trimestre– 
28 
(https://prnoticias.com/2020/07/28/epa-el-periodismo-se-desploma-con-11-400-
empleos-menos-en-el-sector/ ). 

July  2020– 

Prosecution  Council  (2020),  Press  Release-  La  Fiscal  General  del  Estado  impulsa  ante  las 
asociaciones  un  plan  para  afrontar  el  reto  de  la  reforma  procesal–  3  December  2020– 
(https://www.fiscal.es/-/la-fiscal-general-del-estado-impulsa-ante-las-asociaciones-un-plan-para-
afrontar-el-reto-de-la-reforma-procesal ). 

Prosecution  Council  (2021),  Comunicado  del  Consejo  Fiscal  al  Anteproyecto  de  Ley  Orgánica  de 
Enjuiciamiento 
(https://www.fiscal.es/web/fiscal/-/comunicado-del-consejo-fiscal-al-
anteproyecto-de-ley-org-c3-a1nica-de-enjuiciamiento-criminal). 

Criminal 

Supreme Court (2021), Contribution from the Supreme Court for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. 

Technical Cabinet of the Council for the Judiciary (2021), Legal report on the impact of Organic Law 
4/2021 of 29 March. 

Transparency International (2021), Corruption Perceptions Index 2020 (Corruption Perceptions Index 
2020 for New Zealand - Transparency.org). 

23 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Spain 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in April and May 2021 with: 

  Academic experts  
  Association of ‘Abogados del Estado’  
  Association of Prosecutors  
  Civic Platform for the Judicial Independence 
  College of Registrars  
  Constitutional Court 
  Court of Audits  
  European Journalists’ Association  
  FAPE  
  Foundation ‘Hay Derecho’ 
  General Council of Notaries  
  General Council of Spanish Lawyers  
  General Council for the Judiciary  
 
INCIDE 
 
Independent Judicial Forum  
 
Judges and Magistrates’ Association “Francisco de Vitoria”  
 
Judges for Democracy  
  Madrid Press Association  
  Ministry of Foreign Affairs  
  Ministry of Home Affairs 
  Ministry of Justice 
  Ministry of Finance 
  Ministry of the Presidency  
  Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Administration  
  National Anti-Fraud Coordination Service 
  National Commission of Markets and Competition  
  NGO’s Platform for Social Action 
  Technical Office of the Prosecutor General  
  The Independent Office for Procurement Regulation and Oversight (OIReScon) 
  Ombudsperson’s Cabinet  
  Platform in Defense of Freedom of Information  
  Professional Association of the Magistracy  
  Progressive Union of Prosecutors  
  Rights International Spain 
  Prosecutor's Office Against Corruption and Organised Crime 
  State Secretary of Communication  
  Supreme Court  
  Technical Cabinet of the Prosecutor General’s Office  
  Transparency Council  
  Transparency International España  

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings: 

  Amnesty International 
  Center for Reproductive Rights 
  CIVICUS 
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
  Civil Society Europe 
  Conference of European Churches 

24 

 
 
  EuroCommerce 
  European Center for Not-for-Profit Law 
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom 
  European Civic Forum 
  European Federation of Journalists 
  European Partnership for Democracy  
  European Youth Forum 
  Front Line Defenders 
  Human Rights House Foundation  
  Human Rights Watch  
 
ILGA-Europe 
 
International Commission of Jurists 
 
International Federation for Human Rights 
 
International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN) 
 
International Press Institute 
  Netherlands Helsinki Committee  
  Open Society European Policy Institute 
  Philanthropy Advocacy 
  Protection International  
  Reporters without Borders 
  Transparency International EU 

25