Paris (EFE) they took the case to Strasbourg.
In their sentence, the judges consider that the Spanish Constitutional Court did not justify the reasons why it rejected the amparo appeal presented by these judges, which violated their right to judicial protection.
They add that this constitutes a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and consider that the very recognition of this lack constitutes “in itself sufficient just satisfaction” for the moral damage suffered.
A stuck renovation
The six judges were part of the 51 admissible candidates for the renewal of the CGPJ, according to a list released in September 2018. However, with Parliament dissolved twice in 2019 and the renewal of the CGPJ stalled in Parliament, the process did not came to continue.
For this reason, the six magistrates filed an appeal for amparo before the Constitutional Court in 2020, which was rejected in 2021 on the grounds that it had been made outside the three-month period established by the 1979 organic law on the appointment of members of the CGPG.
The Spanish judges turned to the ECHR, which considered that the plaintiffs, as recognized candidates “had the right” to participate in the election procedure for the CGPJ and that their candidacies be studied by Parliament in a timely manner, the Court said in a statement.
And the Strasbourg judges considered that the way in which the Constitutional Court interpreted article 42 of the 1979 law “harmed the very essence of their right to a court for the protection of their civil rights,” the note added.
“This fundamental safeguard was closely connected, in the circumstances of the case, with the guarantee of respect for the legal procedure for the renewal of the composition of the governing body of judges and the very functioning of the judicial system,” explained the ECtHR.