He has endorsed that the Community of Andalusia would use that of its Parliament so as not to interrupt its legislative activity during the Covid Pandemia 19. This decision implies the rejection of most of the appeal presented by the Senate Socialist Parliamentary Group against a Decree-Law of measures that the Andalusian Board proposed to the Parliament of its community to deal with the health emergency. The court has only annulled some provisions when considering that the urgency of its adoption was not argued.
The sentence-of which the magistrate of the conservative sector of the Court has been speech-rules out that the validation agreement of the Decree-Law incurs the vice of unconstitutionality that the recurring blamed him. The Court considers that, in the exceptional circumstances of the case, although the call of the Permanent Diputaci All parliamentary groups of the Chamber) “to overcome the serious interference in the parliamentary activity derived from the health crisis caused by the Covid Pandemic 19”.
The Court reason that the Permanent Diputación, “an organ that guarantees the permanence of the Parliament and its intangibility, allowed to maintain parliamentary activity and at the same time avoid or minimize the risk of infection by Covid 19 between the deputies and the chamber staff.” The ruling adds that the call was based on an admissible interpretation of the parliamentary regulation.
The ruling also dismisses the challenge directed by the recurring against the aforementioned decree-law as a whole, which alleged “a breach of the enabling budget of the extraordinary and urgent need” of the approved measures. The Court, on the other hand, states that “the adoption of liberalization or simplification measures through emergency legislation” was “fully justified” by the Andalusian Board. The sentence has been approved with the discrepant vote of three magistrates, Ramón Sáez, María Luisa Balaguer and Juan Carlos Campo. The magistrate Arnaldo, in turn, will formulate a concurrent vote, according to the ruling, but in which he will add arguments to those of the majority.
