Pedro Sánchez's government has presented a profound and disruptive reform of the judicial and fiscal career with the promise of modernizing access, making it more equitable, and reinforcing the independence of the Public Prosecutor's Office. However, beneath the veneer of progress and democratization, the project raises serious doubts about the true scope of its changes.
The core of this reform, regarding the modification of access and promotion systems, has been harshly criticized by the majority of judicial and fiscal associations, which warn of a real risk of arbitrariness and loss of objectivity in the selection processes.
Five of the seven professional associations have already demanded the withdrawal of the bill that modifies access to the judicial and fiscal careers, known as the Bolaños Law, and the preliminary draft for the reform of the Organic Statute of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
These judicial associations, as well as the Supreme Court and the vast majority of judges and prosecutors, have expressed their concern and rejection of these reforms because they represent direct political interference in the judicial and fiscal career, opening the door to a less rigorous selection that is more susceptible to ideological filtering.
The new access system, as denounced by the judges themselves, lowers excellence and eliminates essential guarantees of merit, capacity, and equality, allowing the entry of hundreds of substitutes without objective tests, which puts at risk the quality and independence of those who must judge and enforce the law.
Regarding the reform of the Statute of the Public Prosecutor's Office, they point out that the proposed text leaves criminal investigations in the hands of prosecutors without guaranteeing the functional autonomy of the institution, unjustifiably increasing the power of the State's Attorney General and eliminating the internal checks and balances necessary for impartial action.
Faced with an executive with authoritarian tendencies, the checks and balances in our society could become insufficient, as we have observed in the processing of some laws such as the amnesty law.
The seriousness of the matter is accentuated when we see that this change comes at a particularly sensitive moment. We cannot ignore the numerous scandals and open processes that affect President Sánchez's own circle and senior socialist officials; especially noteworthy is the procedural-criminal situation of the State's Attorney General. In this context, therefore, giving more power to the Executive over prosecutors and judges is not only a bad idea, it is a real risk to the democratic health of our country.
As a politician, but especially as a lawyer, I have always defended the principles of liberal constitutionalism and that a healthy democracy is based on three fundamental pillars. A legislative power that makes the laws; an executive power that applies them; and a judicial power that ensures they are complied with and our rights are protected. These three powers must be separate and balanced among themselves. When one tries to impose itself on the others, democracy begins to falter.
It is not about technicalities, nor internal debates between institutions, much less political debates. What is at stake is something that affects all citizens, and that is that judges can act without pressure, even if that implies judging those who govern us.
If justice loses this independence, it also loses its capacity to protect us from abuses, outrages, or unfair political decisions.
Could we see, as a result of this reform, how crimes committed by politicians of the ruling party are not prosecuted, and yet only crimes committed by politicians of parties in the opposition are prosecuted? Could the Public Prosecutor's Office be used to persecute politicians who are electorally inconvenient for the ruling party?
Therefore, one of the most controversial points of the Justice reform undertaken by the government is the one that proposes that the criminal investigation be carried out by prosecutors and not by judges as until now. This is especially serious if we take into account that, in our Spanish system, the Public Prosecutor's Office is a pyramidal institution that owes obedience to the State's Attorney General, appointed by the government.
For some it may seem like science fiction, one might think that these things only happen in places like Venezuela, but the reality is that today the Spanish, not Venezuelan, State's Attorney General is being investigated (previously charged) for ordering the leak of judicial matters of the partner of the president of the Autonomous Community of Madrid, Isabel Díaz Ayuso.
For these reasons, I believe that the Bolaños Law is not the modernization that the Spanish Justice needs. It is a hasty reform, processed through the urgent procedure and without the necessary consensus, which responds more to the Government's short-term interests than to a vision of the State. Far from strengthening Justice, it weakens it, politicizes it, and calls into question citizen confidence in its institutions.
This reform is not a democratic advance, it is an institutional setback. It is not modernization, it is intervention. And it is not a solution because, far from responding to a real social demand or solving the structural problems of Justice, it threatens to undermine the constitutional principles that have sustained our Rule of Law for decades.
I am convinced that Spain needs a strong, independent, and free justice system. A justice system that responds only to the law, not to the interests of the party in power. Therefore, I will always defend a real, open, and consensual reform process that reinforces - and does not weaken - judicial independence and the separation of powers.
Let us not leave the judges and courts alone in the defense of our Rule of Law. All legal operators, but also all citizens, must unite to continue fighting to maintain our democratic system and liberal constitutionalism.
For my part, I will always defend conservative principles: individual freedom, legal equality, and fair solidarity.
In short, judicial independence is not a privilege of judges and prosecutors, but the ultimate guarantee that our rights and freedoms will be protected against any abuse, from wherever it comes. If we allow political power to cross red lines and control those who must judge it, we will be renouncing the very essence of democracy. And we cannot allow that.
If our civil society allows these reforms to advance without standing up to them, allow me, with all my sorrow, to go into exile.
Astrid Pérez. President of the PP of Lanzarote
