A rose is a rose Commentary on Constitutional Court Judgment num. 63/2025, of March 12, declaring the unconstitutionality of the reform of Article 133 of the Standing Orders of the Senate. Concerning the action of unconstitutionality num. 7998-2023. (BOE num. 88, of April 11, 2025)

Abstract

In the decision in question, the Constitutional Court declares the reform of Article 133 of the Standing Orders of the Senate, adopted ad hoc to slow
down the consideration of the amnesty bill regarding the events occurred in Catalonia in 2017, unconstitutional and void. It does so on the understanding that it is contrary to the provisions of Article 90 of the Constitution.

This is the first time that the High Court has declared a regulatory provision of the Standing Orders of the Congress of Deputies or the Senate directly
invalid.

The decision notes that the regime ruling the consideration of bills and legislative proposals, as regards the urgent nature of their consideration,
is constitutionally identical, and that no differences can be established based on their different nature. Likewise, it recalls once again the Senate’s
subordinate position within the legislative procedure, as laid down by the constituent Assembly. Finally, it reiterates that the faculty to establish
parliamentary standing orders is conditional upon compliance with the Constitution in their implementation, being the latter a rule to which the
exercise of regulatory autonomy by the Chambers is unfailingly subordinate.

A dissenting opinion was submitted regarding the decision, which acknowledges the correctness of the majority doctrine, although it includes another interpretation favourable to the contested rule, which it considers likewise possible.