Andorra Parties Unite to Strengthen Constitutional Court Independence

All five parliamentary groups in the Consell General have jointly submitted a bill to amend Andorra's Qualified Law on the Constitutional Court, with the aim of reinforcing the institution's independence, autonomy and day-to-day operation. The proposal is backed by Democrats, Concòrdia, the Social Democrats, Andorra Endavant and Ciutadans Compromesos.

The initiative pursues two broad goals: strengthening the guarantees of independence and good governance of the court, and adapting its procedures to current requirements for protecting the rights and freedoms set out in the Constitution. It targets the 1993 Qualified Law on the Constitutional Court, whose consolidated text dates from 2023.

One of the principal changes concerns the court's magistrates, specifically their term of office, grounds for dismissal, incompatibilities and liability regime. Under the proposal, constitutional magistrates could only be held civilly liable in cases of wilful misconduct or serious and inexcusable negligence, aligning their regime with the one currently applied to judges and magistrates in the ordinary judiciary and reinforcing the guarantees attached to their work.

A second block expands the court's capacity for self-government by revising its internal competences, with the goal of drawing a clearer line between strictly jurisdictional functions and those related to administering the institution. The text also changes the rules governing how the plenary operates, particularly the mechanisms for adopting decisions and resolving ties, in an effort to prevent deadlock. In exceptional circumstances, magistrates would be able to take part in deliberations and votes by electronic means.

A third area covers constitutional proceedings, with amendments to the requirements for filings, the grounds for inadmissibility and the handling of appeals for reconsideration. Among the most notable changes is clarification that, in amparo appeals, it will not be necessary to challenge a decision of inadmissibility by the Constitutional Court in order to subsequently apply to the European Court of Human Rights. The sponsors say the clarification is intended to make clear to citizens the steps required to seek redress in Strasbourg in defence of their rights.

The bill also addresses the court's funding and material operations, which its sponsors argue would bolster its independence and its ability to exercise constitutional jurisdiction properly.