Andorran Court Upholds Law Allowing Foreign Judge Appointment

The Andorran Superior Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Qualified Law on Justice, rejecting a challenge by Mayor Alexandra Terés against the appointment of Catalan magistrate Míriam de Rosa.

In a ruling issued by the full bench—including magistrates Jaume Tor, Anna Estragués, Yves Picod, Vincent Anière, Fàtima Ramírez, Carles Cruz, Elsa Puig, Alexandra Cornella, and Immaculada Rodríguez—the court dismissed Terés's claim that the law violates the Constitution. Terés had argued that selecting De Rosa through an open competition for qualified jurists contravened the second transitional provision, which limits foreign judges and magistrates to situations "while it is not possible to do otherwise," and Article 25, which reserves public and institutional posts for nationals. She contended that 32 years after the Constitution's adoption, a fully Andorranised judiciary was feasible.

The court found no grounds for unconstitutionality. It clarified that Article 25 applies only to political or institutional representation roles—such as the head of government, ministers, or councillors—and excludes judges, who fall under Title VII on the judiciary, with no explicit nationality requirements.

Addressing the transitional provision, the magistrates ruled that the law fully complies by implementing progressive Andorranisation measures. These include capping non-Andorran magistrates at half of any tribunal's members, unless no suitable Andorran candidates are available. The law also establishes two entry paths: promotion from Andorran batlles (mayors) and fiscales (prosecutors), who must hold Andorran nationality, and open competitions for recognised expert jurists like De Rosa and Terés.

Under the promotion system, three of every four magistrate positions must be filled by Andorrans. The open path prioritises merit and technical competence, favouring Andorrans only in cases of equal qualifications.

The court noted that the Constitution imposes no deadline on the transitional provision and leaves the phrase "while it is not possible to do otherwise" to legislative interpretation. Prioritising expertise over nationality, with Andorran preference only on equal merits, raises no constitutional issues, the ruling concluded.