Legebiltzarreko Aldizkaria – LEGAL – Revista del Parlamento Vasco está editada y promovida por el Parlamento Vasco. Es una revista especializada en aquellas áreas del Derecho que son de interés para las cámaras legislativas. Revista de acceso abierto (Open Access) con periodicidad anual, digital y gratuita tanto para autores como para lectores y revisada por pares. Está dirigida a profesionales del derecho y su objetivo principal es ser medio de difusión del conocimiento derivado de la actividad investigadora en materia de Derecho parlamentario, Derecho constitucional, Derecho administrativo y el Derecho público en general, así como cualquier otro tema que, de una u otra manera, tenga incidencia en la vida parlamentaria.
Esta revista provee acceso libre a su contenido. Todo su contenido desde el momento de la publicación está disponible de forma gratuita. Todos los artículos de esta revista se editarán bajo la licencia Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional. La reutilización de los trabajos podrá hacerse bajo esta licencia.
Gordillo Pérez, Luis I. (2025). Las crisis de las democracias representativas
Copyright (c) 2026 Ignacio Álvarez Rodríguez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Parliament is a common element in today’s democratic systems. Parliamentary groups or parties are the real protagonists of today’s parliaments, as a consequence of the historical evolution that has placed political parties at the centre of contemporary pluralist democracies. Regarding parties, legal studies have developed particularly in Germany. A closer look at German law is therefore useful for understanding how this political reality has been translated into law. This study examines the legal regime of parliamentary groups in the German Bundestag (Fraktionen), also considering the historical and doctrinal context. Finally, some interesting issues are addressed that highlight the limits of legal regulation itself within the framework of a somewhat tense relationship between groups, parties, and members of parliament.
Copyright (c) 2026 Lluís Subiela https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Copyright (c) 2025 Zelai Nikolas Ezkurdia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Feminist legal theory, legal interpretation and adjudicative function
From a constitutional perspective, this article engages with the feminist critique of legal interpretation to foreground the contributions that Feminist Legal Theory has made to legal hermeneutics since its emergence in the 1960s and 1970s. It then turns to the notion of gender perspective, which –despite ongoing resistance and critique– has gained the widest recognition within contemporary constitutional and international frameworks. The discussion begins by exploring the various understandings of what it means to incorporate this approach into the judicial function. It then examines the gradual integration of the gender perspective into the Spanish legal system. Finally, the article analyses the methods and interpretive principles that give concrete meaning to this approach.
Copyright (c) 2026 Alicia Cárdenas Cordón https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Is it possible to practise constitutional law in the times we live in? A commentary on Constitutional Court Judgment 137/2025 of 26 june concerning the amnesty act
Constitutional Court Judgment 137/2025 resolves the first of the actions of unconstitutionality brought against Organic Law 1/2024 on amnesty for the institutional, political, and social normalization of Catalonia. The decision—one of the most politically significant in the Court’s history—upholds the essence of the statute, despite declaring some of its provisions unconstitutional. In a context of intense doctrinal polarization, the Court has missed the opportunity to issue an integrative judgment grounded in a solid constitutional theory of amnesty. On the one hand, the purported ideological neutrality of the law is presented as an ontological fact devoid of any meaningful reasoning. On the other, the excessive reliance on the so-called proportionality test leads to evaluative judgments of policy expediency that ultimately weaken the legal soundness of the conclusions.
Copyright (c) 2025 Joaquín Urías Martínez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Exclusive jurisdiction of the autonomous community of the Basque Country in housing matters
This paper aims to analyse the exclusive competence of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country in housing matters. Its purpose is to identify the scope, opportunities and limits of that exclusive competence in the regulation of housing. To this end, the paper first examines the legal foundations of the right to housing in the Spanish Constitution and in international legal instruments, as well as the distinction between objective and subjective rights. It then outlines the legal framework of the exclusive competence of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country in this field. The paper also examines the transversal competences of the State and their limits, together with the relevant case law of the Constitutional Court. On that basis, it provides a brief analysis of Law 12/2023, of 24 May, on the Right to Housing, including its main contributions and objectives, as well as the appeals lodged against it and the corresponding decisions, with particular attention to the appeal filed by the Basque Government. Finally, the paper sets out its general conclusions.
Copyright (c) 2026 Marrubi Bregaña https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Open constitution and powers of Parliament. Commentary on Constitutional Court ruling 137/2025, of june 26, on the amnesty law
The approval of Organic Law 1/2024, of June 10, on amnesty for the institutional, political, and social normalization of Catalonia, immediately raised many doubts about its constitutionality. Constitutional Court Ruling 137/2025 declared it constitutional. This paper criticizes this ruling, arguing that it endorses a constitutional amendment without following the reform procedure, as denounced by the dissenting justices. The Court's response –which contradicts the wording of Article 66 of the Spanish Constitution, the regulation of the right of pardon in Article 62, and the constitutional debates– I consider erroneous. Even assuming that granting amnesty had been a politically and socially peaceful matter, from a strictly legal-constitutional perspective, there are very strong arguments to support the claim that the Spanish Parliament does not have the power to grant amnesties.
Copyright (c) 2025 Javier Tajadura Tejada https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Joan Ridao (2025). Dret Parlamentari de Catalunya. Barcelona: Atelier
Copyright (c) 2025 Martiño Sarmiento Murias, Xosé Antón Sarmiento Méndez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
The inviolability of parliamentarians and the crisis of institutional decorum
Parliamentary immunity, an essential guarantee of representative mandate, requires critical analysis in light of the controversial behaviour of some parliamentarians, which has also gained considerable publicity thanks to the widespread use of new technologies. Based on the study of relatively recent incidents in various legislative chambers, it is possible to examine the ethical and legal limits of such immunity, as well as the mechanisms for moderating debates and the powers of the Presidency of the chambers to that effect. Political analysis and the experiences of comparative constitutional law allow us to offer pragmatic proposals for redefining the limits of this prerogative, with the aim of maintaining institutional dignity and promoting constructive parliamentary debate.
Copyright (c) 2025 Francisco Valiente Martínez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
The work aims to study the changes in the women’s political representation paradigm. To that extent, firstly we study the origins and implementation, and secondly both their developments and nowadays conditions, wondering about the chances of success within the main representative institution, the parliament. Lastly, we expose some necessary, but obviously temporary, conclusions.
Copyright (c) 2025 Ignacio Álvarez Rodríguez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Copyright (c) 2025 Fabián Salvioli, Jon-Mirena Landa Gorostiza https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
III Jornadas parlamentarias: Parlamento y nuevos retos en la gobernanza (2025). Palacio del Congreso de los Diputados, 16 y 17 de mayo de 2024. Madrid: Congreso de los Diputados
Copyright (c) 2025 José Carlos Nieto Jiménez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Parliamentary courtesy and deliberation as a symbol of parliament
Parliaments are representative assemblies where plural debate precedes the adoption of agreements; since plurality and differences are inherent to parliament, the rules of debate based on courtesy are inseparable from the nature and activity on parliamentary business. In other words, pluralism calls for deliberation based on courtesy, as a condition that legitimizes the contrast of opinions, therefore, politeness is a requirement of pluralism value.
Copyright (c) 2025 Maria Rosa Ripollés Serrano https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Legislative initiative of parliamentary origin and its subjection to rules of technical and regulatory quality
This work analyses the parliamentary legislative initiative in the Basque Parliament, focusing on the need to establish normative quality and legislative technique guarantees in both the proposal and processing phases. It addresses concepts such as equality in the exercise of parliamentary functions, parliamentary autonomy, the distinction between governmental and parliamentary legislative initiatives, and the importance of legislative techniques in ensuring the consistency and quality of the legal system. The influence of the European Union in promoting regulatory quality and the introduction of technologies such as artificial intelligence into the legislative process is also highlighted.
Copyright (c) 2025 Raúl Gómez Iñigo https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Comment on constitutional court of spain judgement 143/2024 in relation to judgments 154/2024 and 156/2024
This commentary analyzes the ruling 143/2024 of the Constitutional Court, taking as reference also the subsequent judgments 154/2024 and 156/2024. The conflict which gave rise to these judgments is found in the agreement of the bureau of the Parliament of Catalonia authorizing the processing of a popular legislative initiative aimed at recognizing the independence of Catalonia. In the opinion of the appellants, the Bureau of the Chamber has an obligation not to admit to trial initiatives radically contrary to the Constitution, since that admittion does not only affect the fundamental rights of parliamentarians, but also legitimizes an initiative that is manifestly unconstitutional. Against this idea, the other side defends the legitimacy of such a decision, arguing that it is fundamental to defend the political debate, essential in a democratic state like Spain. However, through these rulings the Constitutional Court confirms its previously established jurisprudence: the parliamentary bureaux must not only control the form of initiatives, but also have an obligation to examine the unconstitutionality of their content. In the face of this trend, however, there are already views that advocate political debate and pluralism. Moreover, while constitutional control is necessary, it must have clear limits, in order to ensure a healthy democracy. Therefore, this paper also briefly reflects on the balance between the fundamental political debate in parliaments and the constitutional control exercised by the Constitutional Court in the legislative chambers.
Commens on Legislation and Jurisprudence
Copyright (c) 2025 Eneko Lizarazu Oses, Jone Vadillo Arrieta https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Parliamentary privilege, acceptance of a Popular Legislative Initiative (ilp) by the Parliamentary Bureau and oversight by the Constitutional Court.
The commentary on STC 143/2024 highlights the problems caused by the lack of implementation of a legal category: parliamentary privilege. The Ruling’s interpretation of the term ‘resolutions’ (Articles 76 and 77 Constitutional Court Organic Act, LOTC) overlooks a preliminary question, which is the absence of jurisdiction on the ordinary activity and functioning of parliamentary chambers. The recognition of the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court (CC) over parliamentary activity in the case of enforcing rulings has no grounds in statutory law. No legislation empowers the CC in this regard. It is an order of the Constitutional Court itself that provides that possibility, an order self-referenced by the CC itself in a ruling, but which it is impossible to find on its official page. A new legal procedure now has to be added for parliamentary oversight, which is the one envisaged in Title V of the LOTC. A new procedure to control the functioning of the parliamentary chambers has thus emerged, which is contrary to the principle of their parliamentary privilege and which limits the scope of the democratic principle. That is clearly expressed by the Individual Opinion of Judge Ramón Sáez Valcárcel.
Copyright (c) 2025 Iñaki Lasagabaster Herrarte https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Hearing of José Manuel Castells in the Special Committee on Self-Government of the Basque Parliament (02.05.2002)
Copyright (c) 2025 José Manuel Castells Arteche, Iñaki Agirreazkuenaga https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
This study aims to understand the recently adopted Regulation (EU) on transparency and targeting of political advertising. To do so, the circumstances of the Regulation is first analysed, and then its consequences on the dissemination of disinformation are studied. In order to understand these circumstances, we examine what online political advertising is, what it is used for and what its relationship to disinformation is, mostly through the social science academy. Once the object of the Regulation has been decided, a brief review is made of the legal framework in force to date, which makes it possible to identify possible shortcomings. Once the circumstances of the Regulation have been established, the article moves on to its content with the intention of offering a general image of the regulatory text, examining its most relevant measures. Finally, an assessment is made of the measures analysed in order to determine to what extent they reduce the phenomenon of misinformation initially analysed. After all the research, it is concluded that the Regulation succeeds in addressing the problems initially raised and the shortcomings of the regulations currently in force. Moreover, in line with the constitutional doctrine to date, it achieves this objective without controlling its contents. Finally, it is noted that the Regulation reinforces political communication through the community, highlighting the impact this may have on increasing misinformation.
Copyright (c) 2024 Iker Lauzirika Ansola https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Copyright (c) 2024 Montserrat Auzmendi del Solar https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Hearing of Miguel Herrero y Rodríguez de Miñón in the Special Committee on Self-Government of the Basque Parliament (2002.5.21)
Copyright (c) 2024 Miguel Herrero y Rodríguez de Miñón, Elixabete Piñol Olaeta https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Parliamentary enquiry, like any other State activity, must have a possible object (naturally and legally). This object is legally defined according to two criteria: the public interest (art. 76.1 CE) and the link with a constitutional competence attributed to the Cortes Generales. When the parliamentary investigation cannot be based on these two criteria simultaneously, then it is contrary to the Constitution. Although the first of the criteria, the public interest, is nebulous, the link with a competence attributed to the Cortes Generales simplifies the delimitation of the object of the parliamentary enquiry. In this sense, the institutional position of the Head of State, the division of powers (horizontal and vertical) and the time factor delimit the possible object of the parliamentary enquiry.
Copyright (c) 2024 Brian Buchhalter Montero, Inv. Predoctoral (FPU) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Commentary on the judgments of the Constitutional Court 8/2024, of january 16, and 18/2024, of january 31: “Alberto Rodríguez case”
The sentences analyzed have singular relevance in two aspects: the correct understanding of technicallegal concepts of a criminal nature, such as the principle of proportionality, analogy and extensive interpretation, as well as the analysis of the limits of the Constitutional Court in relation to the functions attributed to other powers of the State, especially the judicial and legislative.
Copyright (c) 2024 Francisco Javier Ruiz Bursón https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Open parliament indicators in regional assemblies of European Union states
The application of open government principles to regional legislative assemblies inevitably leads to the term open parliament. In this new approach, parliamentary chambers must concentrate their efforts towards greater transparency and collaboration that will encourage citizen participation. Information and communication technologies play a fundamental role in achieving the fullness of these three aspects, which, considered as indicators, allow the degree of openness of a parliament to be evaluated. With this new approach, representative democracy and participatory democracy find the right moment to walk hand in hand, institutionalising the meeting points. For this reason, this study will evaluate the degree of openness of the regional legislative assemblies of the member states of the European Union through the indicators of participation, transparency and collaboration, in order to find out the degree of implementation of the principles of open parliament at the European regional level.
Copyright (c) 2024 Francisco Javier López Hernández https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Comment on Constitutional Court Judgement 10/2024
This commentary deals with the ruling 10/2024 of the Constitutional Court. The controversy underneath arose when a Government’s decree had to be validated by Parliament. According to a deputy from the Popular Group, the Government failed to send all the necessary information related to the decree. The Constitutional Court assesses whether this lack of information would imply a violation of the ius in officium of parliamentary members. More specifically, the Court explains to what extent a lack of technical reports can affect the fundamental rights of deputies. It is worth mentioning that the ius in officium can run risk, particularly in two key moments. Firstly, when a law decree is validated. And secondly, when law decrees are brought under the rules of law-projects. There is a remarkable clash between what law strictly says, and what parliamentary principles recommend. The Constitutional Court leans towards a more positivist view, although not leaving the referred principles aside. Finally, a brief comment can be found on how this ruling has affected the checks and balances between the legislative and the executive.
Copyright (c) 2024 Aratz Labaien Gorospe, Markel Zubiaga Iriarte https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
The Spanish Constitutional Court ruled on the passing of the Solidarity Tax through an amendment to the Act 38/2022, of 27 December, in its Judgement no. 149/2023. In this comment, the merits of the ruling shall be analyzed according to the previous case-law of the Court, to which it adds a new and less clear criterion to define the scope of the right of amendment. Moreover, the conspicuous fact that the Tax was proposed and passed by the Government by means of its parliamentary groups, serves as a cornerstone to the applicable perception of the right of amendment, which, until now, has been considered mainly a right of the backbenchers. New reflections upon the right of amendment and, in general, the legislative procedure in the Spanish parliamentary system are therefore expected to be sparked sooner than later after the issuing of this judgement.
Copyright (c) 2024 Nicolás Pulido Azpíroz https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
In this judgment, the Constitutional Court applies its well-established case law on the duty of the bureaux of the legislative chambers to refuse parliamentary initiatives whose processing may lead to the failure to comply with their judgments and orders, on the occasion of an appeal for protection filed ex Article 42 LOTC by parliamentarians who are not the authors of the parliamentary initiative, which is the subject of the appeal. The Constitutional Court considers the appeal, stating that the ius in officium of Article 23 SC also includes the right of parliamentarians to prevent the processing of parliamentary initiatives filed by other parliamentarians, whenever this ones involve the non compliance of previous TC resolutions. The analysis of the judgment argues that this doctrine poses an incident of execution of the TC resolutions in favour of parliamentarians at the expense of denaturalizing the parlamentary protection appeal.
Copyright (c) 2024 Raúl Gómez Iñigo https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
This paper proposes a general description of parliamentary communication in Spanish assemblies, with special attention to digital communication. Based on a review of the non-systematized literature, it aims, firstly, to detect milestones that help to understand the importance of communications technology in the dissemination of the activity of legislative assemblies. Secondly, an exploratory analysis of how Spanish parliaments use their X profiles is carried out. The conclusions show that parliaments maintain traditional communication in social media (from one sender to several receivers) and are based on institutional agenda content. Therefore, it requires new communication skills and poses changing challenges for parliamentary institutions.
Copyright (c) 2024 Eva Campos Domínguez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Sanz Pérez, A. L. Fundamentos de derecho parlamentario español. Madrid: Colex, 2023
Copyright (c) 2023 Marco Fernández Gutiérrez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Copyright (c) 2023 Montserrat Auzmendi del Solar https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Hearing of Ángel Cárcoba Alonso before the working group on the asbestos (Basque Parliament. 2012.5.15)
Copyright (c) 2023 Ángel Cárcoba Alonso, Montserrat Auzmendi del Solar https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0