Moncloa has not requested a report from the Council of State in the last five laws after receiving four setbacks

• Institutions Sánchez places Magdalena Valerio, minister of his first government, at the head of the Council of State

The

, the highest consultative body of the

, is reputed to be independent.

Its permanent advisers, whether conservative or progressive, all have brilliant resumes as lawyers and extensive experience in state affairs.

They are the hard core that must prepare, with the institution's lawyers, the opinions on the most important legislative initiatives of the Executive.

Their reports are not binding but their legal rigor very often makes them a goblet that the Government prefers not to rush.

In this legislature, there have been multiple cases of opinions with negative appraisals from the Council of State on initiatives to which the Executive granted maximum importance, and on many occasions the Government, making use of the possibility of not feeling bound by the opinion of the Council, has ignored

This is the case, for example, of the suspicions raised by the advisory body to

, better known as the

;

or those exposed in relation to the

, popularly known as

;

or those that he evacuated, and the Government tried to hide, about the decree of management and distribution of the funds of the European Union.

two methods

These blows have induced the Executive to try to avoid the reports of the Council in the initiatives that it foresees thorny in advance.

To circumvent the opinions, the Government uses two methods: the proposal of law and the most urgent procedure.

The first consists of having the initiatives signed by the parliamentary groups.

In this way, instead of being bills, they are considered bills and, since their paternity is not attributed to the Executive, they do not require reports from the constitutional bodies.

It is the method that the Government has used, for example, to avoid the Council's rulings on the

or on the reform proposals of the

to restrict the functions of the CGPJ when the mandate of its members has expired and, subsequently, to allow only the appointment of two members of the Constitutional Court.

The second method, consisting of giving maximum urgency to its initiatives and, consequently, demanding the opinion of the Council within an express term, has been used for projects such as the

.

Precisely in that report, the Council made the Government ugly for its increasingly habitual haste without there being sufficient reasons to justify the urgency.

Sometimes even the supposed urgency is used by the Executive to not even request an opinion.

This is the case, for example, of the draft

or the

.

, also promoted as an urgent procedure,

been reported, despite its importance and its impact on public debate .

In this case, the Government's justification is that the report is not mandatory due to the nature of the rule.

The bill on

also does not have an opinion, as does the already approved

.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more

• constitutional Court

• General Council of the Judiciary

• Justice