• Direct. Last minute about the coronavirus crisis
  • The map: the advance of the coronavirus in Spain
  • Justice: The Prosecutor's Office rejects the Supreme Court suspending the decree of the state of alarm
  • Consequences: The State is preparing for a barrage of lawsuits for the mismanagement of the coronavirus crisis

The Supreme Court refuses to review the statement of the state of alarm imposed by the coronavirus crisis . In a car, to which EL MUNDO has had access, the Contentious-Administrative Chamber explains that the "possibility of control" of the decree declaring a state of alarm corresponds, "without a doubt", to the Constitutional Court "in the exercise of its powers to control the constitutionality of laws and regulations with the rank of law. " Both the Prosecutor's Office and the State Attorney's Office had defended the jurisdiction of the guarantee court to analyze appeals against the state of alarm.

The Third Chamber pronounces in these terms in a resolution declaring the appeal against Royal Decree 463/2020, of March 14, of the state of alarm for the management of the health crisis caused by Covid-19, and against the three Royal subsequent decrees to extend the aforementioned state of emergency.

In this way, the High Court partially inadmissible the appeal of the lawyer, Curro Nicolau , who argued that the Government of Pedro Sánchez was adopting, under the cover of the state of alarm, measures typical of the "state of emergency" to limit the fundamental right to liberty individual freedom of movement throughout the national territory and the right of assembly.

It is a partial inadmissibility because the Chamber, in a self-presentation by the magistrate Jorge Rodríguez Zapata, does agree to review the ministerial order of Salvador Illa - Order SND 370/2020, of April 25 - on the conditions in which they must be developed. displacement by the child population, although he denies the precautionary measure requested by Nicolau where he asked for freedom of movement so that his minor daughter could move with him to his residence in Alp (Gerona).

Control over the acts of application of the alarm

The Supreme Court stresses that "the lack of jurisdiction over decree declaring the state of alarm refers only to the norm of declaration and its extensions, but not to the decrees or provisions that accompany said declaration or that are issued during its validity or in relation to with the same nor with respect to its acts of application ".

The magistrates explain that the appeal of the Valencian lawyer, against the Health order, constitutes a "special procedure for the protection of fundamental rights in which the constitutionality test to be applied must be a reinforced canon, since not only is the right to effective judicial protection derived from a decision of inadmissibility but also the substantive fundamental rights invoked in this appeal. "

They also add that the Chamber can exercise jurisdictional control "in those situations in which the account has not occurred to Congress or the authorization for parliamentary extension required by Article 116.2 Constitution has not been issued " for the state of alarm .

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Supreme court
  • constitutional Court
  • Salvador Illa
  • State of alarm
  • Coronavirus
  • Covid 19

JusticeThe jurists see "crazy" that the de-escalation depends on "orders" of Illa in the BOE

Coronavirus "I am going to report to the Ministry of Health"

Covid-19Medical unions, nurses' colleges and CSIF complain against Minister Salvador Illa over 'fake' masks