The Constitutional annuls the law of Castilla y León that allowed hunting wolves north of the Duero

The Plenary of the Constitutional Court has upheld the unconstitutionality appeal filed by the Government against the hunting law that Castilla y León approved in 2021 that allowed wolf hunting.

The magistrates conclude that the rule affects and contradicts the basic regulations on the environment and, therefore, invades the powers of the State.

The appealed precepts of the regional law and that are annulled were those that affected the wolf populations located north of the Duero river and that allowed their hunting after obtaining a regional administrative authorization.

The sentence, for which Judge

has been a rapporteur , concludes that the contested precepts violate the constitutional order of distribution of powers, because they lower the level of environmental protection that for the wolf derives from its inclusion in the List of Wild Species in Special Protection Regime, updated by the Ministry for Ecological Transition in September 2021.

From the moment this modification entered into force, the minimum protection regime provided for in the natural heritage and biodiversity law was applied to the wolf populations located north of the Duero.

It prohibits any action carried out with the purpose of killing, capturing, persecuting or disturbing the specimens of the species, subspecies or populations included in a list of protected species.

Therefore, the contested provisions, approved in July 2021 and initially in accordance with the basic regulations of the state, suffered a supervening unconstitutionality when the modification of the state regulation was approved last September.

The Junta and the Cortes of Castilla y León argued that the ministerial order that in September incorporated the wolf into the list of protected species does not have the character of basic regulations that must be respected.

He stressed that several contentious-administrative appeals are pending before the National High Court.

The decision of the Plenary has two individual votes.

Magistrates Enrique Arnaldo and Concepción Espejel agree that the ministerial order that the rest of the magistrates have considered basic "lacks and exceeds the authorization conferred by the legislator, so it cannot be considered formally or materially basic and, therefore, it cannot be used as a parameter for judging regional law".

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more