The countdown clock expired at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, leaving Spain’s Ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs facing direct legal consequences after failing to fully satisfy a Supreme Court ultimatum regarding the voting rights of 163,020 citizens, elmundo.es reported.
The Fourth Section of the Supreme Court’s Third Chamber had ordered Félix Bolaños and José Manuel Albares to hand over the complete nominal list of 163,020 individuals affected by a judicial suspension of voting rights. The measure targets beneficiaries of the law of grandchildren who lack a certificate that proves their condition as descendants of forced exiles.
While the Ministry of Justice successfully delivered data concerning 70,000 individuals nationalized in 2025 and 2026 through the digital platform of the Civil Registry, compliance from the foreign ministry lagged behind. According to elmundo.es, internal sources at the Ministry of Justice confirmed they transmitted their records on October 15, noting that their segment of the population was fully identified. In contrast, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs struggled against logistical constraints to assemble documentation from scattered international consulates and embassies.
The high-stakes judicial battle centers on the upcoming November 29 elections and the integrity of the CERA census for absentee residents abroad, which was formally closed on August 1. The administrative dispute originally involved nearly 170,000 affected files, with figures varying slightly across judicial filings.
The Threat of Penal Liability and Fines
SPAINThe Supreme Court has given Bolaños and Albares 5 days to submit the names of the 163,020 individuals affected by the "Grandchildren’s Law" (Ley de Nietos); failure to comply could result in a financial penalty or a criminal investigation. These individuals obtained… pic.twitter.com/WzRFjWeBm7
The Supreme Court made clear that defiance of its order carries severe institutional penalties. In an auto issued the previous Friday, the magistrates warned that incomplete submissions would result in coercive fines or the deduction of legal testimonies to initiate penal liability proceedings against responsible officials.
Judicial sources indicated that the high court intended to press Albares until the final hour, raising the prospect of state officials answering before the Second Chamber for criminal non-compliance. Government spokeswoman Elma Saiz insisted publicly that the departments remained committed to utilizing all necessary resources to meet the deadline, though internal pessimism persisted within foreign service posts regarding the physical impossibility of auditing every consular file on such short notice.
Judicial Coordination and Electoral Safeguards
Faced with the prospect of incomplete administrative compliance, the Supreme Court ruled out a total annulment of absentee voting. The high court determined that a blanket prohibition on the CERA vote was not an option.
Instead, the Supreme Court stated that if it does not obtain the complete list, it must choose between vetoing all CERA votes, which it rules out, or allowing the 163,020 individuals to vote. The State Attorney’s Office had previously appealed the provisional suspension, arguing that reviewing nearly 170,000 files before the November 29 election date violated fundamental suffrage rights due to material impossibility. The Supreme Court rejected that appeal, maintaining that the electoral right is subject to general interests such as preserving census verifiability, though the ruling featured a dissenting opinion from Magistrate Millán Herrandis warning of irreversible electoral disenfranchisement.
