.      1.-Macías Castaño, in his book, affirms that there has been an authentic constitutional reform. The CJEU has imposed a change in our constitutional jurisprudence.

.

.      2.-This conclusion needs some explanations. Actually, nobody has amended the text of the article 24.2 CE (Spanish Constitution). But the solid and stable interpretation made by our Constitutional Court has evaporated.

 

.      3.-Macías concludes that there has been another substantial mutation. Commentators and jurists had understood that the preliminary ruling question was a peculiar form of “dialogue” between Courts (specifically, between CJEU and national Courts). However, it is now probably working as a genuine judicial review in the hands of the European Court. The author warns that this blunt solution could discourage the request for a preliminary ruling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

***

1.-The Constitutional Tribunal is the highest interpreter of our Constitution. Until now, this Court considered that the right to effective judicial protection (art. 24 Spanish Constitution: CE) implied “the right to participate in person in a trial and to self- defend”. This constitutional regulation also indicated  that “the defendants right to be present in a trial  is a requirement of audi alterem partem principle and a tool to allow the exercise of the right to self-defence against prosecution” (Judgement  91/2000, march 30^th, third section of legal basis). So, in case of heavy penalties, no person shall be condemned in his absence, eventhough he had designated a lawyer as a representative in oral arguments.

.

 

2.-But, in its judgement 26/2014, February 13^th, the Constitutional Court changed the jurisprudence and considered that a condemnation without the presence of the defendant doesn’t infringe on the Spanish Constitution. However, this High Tribunal imposed three conditions:

-The defendant has freely chosen his absence. His option is clear and unambiguous.

-The defendant has been rightly notified.

-The defendant has appointed a lawyer. Moreover, this attorney has effectively defended the position of the accused.

.

3.-This transformation is not only a mere evolution in Constitutional Court jurisprudence, but it’s a change caused by a judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union  (CJEU) that decided a preliminary ruling question about interpretation and validity of European Law. That was the only question proposed by the Spanish Constitutional Court until now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

***