Subscribe
The Spanish Supreme Court has upheld the fine imposed by the Central Electoral Board (JEC) on Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez for using official facilities to make statements with electoral content during the campaign period.
The penalty, amounting to €2,200, was confirmed after Sánchez’s appeal, in which he argued that the JEC had unduly restricted his freedom of expression. However, the Administrative Disputes Chamber of the high court dismissed his appeal, emphasising the importance of institutional neutrality during electoral processes.
The offence in question occurred on 30 June 2023, during a press conference following the European Union Council meeting in Brussels, when the Prime Minister referred to his administration’s performance and directly criticised his political opponents, particularly People’s Party (PP) and VOX. For the JEC, these comments violated Article 50.2 of the General Electoral Regime Organic Law (LOREG), which prohibits public authorities from engaging in acts that could be considered electoral propaganda.
The Supreme Court’s ruling stressed that the principle of neutrality during an election period is not merely a formality but a fundamental safeguard to preserve fairness in the political contest. According to the judgment, Sánchez’s statements not only promoted the achievements of his government but also included disparaging remarks about his rivals, which, in the view of both the JEC and the Supreme Court, represented an attempt to influence the electorate from an institutional position.
In his defence, the Prime Minister argued that his comments were part of the normal exercise of his political role and that the imposed penalty limited his right to free expression. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court responded that the restriction established by the LOREG is legitimate and necessary during an electoral period, precisely to prevent those in power from using their position and state resources for political gain.
This case rekindles the debate over the use of public resources in election campaigns and respect for institutional neutrality. Although the imposed fine is not substantial, its symbolic significance is undeniable, as it highlights the need to prevent undue advantages for those in power.
The Court’s ruling also reinforces the authority of the JEC as a guarantor of the integrity of the electoral process, in a context where partisan use of institutions is a recurring source of controversy. It should be noted that this is not the first time the JEC has sanctioned political leaders for breaching electoral neutrality. Similar cases have affected both Socialist and Popular Party governments in the past, demonstrating that the current regulations apply universally, regardless of party affiliation. However, the ruling against Pedro Sánchez takes on special significance due to his position as head of the government and the polarised context in which it occurs.
Beyond the legal aspects, this episode also carries political implications. The opposition has interpreted the fine as evidence of the partisan use the current government makes of institutions, while the government has sought to downplay the matter, calling it a minor issue. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court’s confirmation of the penalty strengthens the idea that vigilance over the neutrality of public authorities during election periods is more necessary than ever.
The Sánchez government has pushed for a so-called “democratic regeneration” strategy that would seek to target disinformation in social media and in day to day politics. However, this ruling raises even more questions about Sánchez aims.
In short, the Supreme Court’s decision sets an important precedent and underscores the need for political leaders to maintain strict impartiality in official acts during election campaigns. Protecting fairness in democratic processes requires that those in power, regardless of their political affiliation, refrain from using institutional resources and platforms to promote their own image or undermine their adversaries. Respecting these norms is essential for democratic quality and for maintaining citizens’ trust in institutions.