Security, justice and corruption

Rego’s amendment 15 rejects simply increasing penalties as the response to repeated petty theft. It proposes community work, training and rehabilitation alternatives while retaining a cumulative €400 threshold; it does not oppose every sanction for repeat offending.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Final repeat-offending text and overall vote, 26 March 2026; individual vote verified in the official JSON. Valido votes for the final repeat-offending law allowing imprisonment for repeated petty theft after final convictions. The official file verifies her individual vote; this neither attributes the entire Mixed Group’s vote to CC nor confuses it with her February abstention on a different version.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports stronger criminal penalties for repeated theft, alongside court resources and proportionality. Supports the original text while rejecting the Senate amendments; these are distinct decisions.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Iñarritu explicitly opposes increasing sentences for repeated petty offences, arguing for social prevention, more judges and exclusion orders instead. He does not advocate impunity for theft.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Vallugera criticises the harsher-sentencing approach to repeated theft and proposes more judges and staff and enforcement of existing law. The assessment rests on her substantive criticism, rather than the party’s abstention on the bill.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports stronger criminal penalties for repeated theft, alongside court resources and proportionality.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Rejects higher penalties for petty theft and calls for other responses to crime.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports stronger criminal penalties for repeated theft, alongside court resources and proportionality.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports stronger criminal penalties for repeated theft, alongside court resources and proportionality.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Rejects higher penalties for petty theft and calls for other responses to crime.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Catalán supports the repeated-theft sentencing reform and criticises its delay. It concerns repeated convictions, rather than arrests.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports imprisonment after repeated convictions and recalls its aggravating-circumstance proposal.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

PP’s Valencian presidential candidate’s investiture speech, directly reported by Europa Press (2025; territorial context). In his investiture speech, Pérez Llorca supports publishing crime statistics by nationality to inform proportionate decisions. This is Valencia PP’s 2025 statistical transparency proposal, not a proposal to publicly identify each arrested person or assign collective guilt.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

UPN parliamentary group statement on statistical transparency in Navarre (2026; territorial context). López Mañero supports publishing origin and nationality statistics with population context and without stigmatising groups. She proposes quarterly publication in Navarre and cites existing national Interior Ministry data; this does not imply that all arrested people are guilty.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Proposes publishing nationality in sexual-assault statistics. This point does not specify arrest-versus-conviction methodology; no causal link with migration is inferred.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Rego opposes removing parliamentary selection of judicial members, defending democratic oversight over selection by the judiciary.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Judicial associations’ account of their 18 December 2018 meeting with CC (historical evidence). The participants’ published account records Ana Oramas rejecting direct election of judicial council members by judges through open lists. This is a substantive 2018 position on that model, separate from objections to legislative amendments; it is not inferred from a 2026 vote to open another legislative process.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Zubiaga opposes shifting election of the twelve judicial members to judicial associations and the judiciary, defending the democratic contribution of parliamentary selection and territorial diversity.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Pagès explicitly rejects judges electing judicial council members. He also opposes party quota-sharing and proposes enforced term limits and objective, transparent appointments.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Santana opposes judicial self-selection of the council, announces opposition and defends democratic justice.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Proposes direct selection of the twelve judicial council members by judges.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Aranda defends parliamentary selection of council members and opposes transferring it to judicial associations.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Retains parliamentary selection of judicial members, with transparency and council-power reforms.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Catalán advocates restoring the pre-1985 system in which judges elected the judicial members.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto, copy published by RTVE (historical reference). Wants judges to appoint or nominate all judicial council members, going further than judicial election of the twelve members asked about.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Galician Parliament session diary no. 32, 7 June 2017: BNG’s own amendment (p. 64), Olalla Rodil’s speech (p. 68) and vote (p. 88). Territorial and historical evidence. BNG negotiated the unanimously approved resolution to remove Galician MPs’ special court privilege through statutory reform and a national agreement. It preserves free parliamentary speech and votes, a separate safeguard. This is historical regional evidence, not a new commitment covering every Spanish officeholder.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

González Taño supports retaining special jurisdiction for official duties and extending that model across Spain, rather than abolishing it entirely. Historical reference from 2018.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Proposes abolishing special jurisdiction for public office holders and public servants.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Own Senate intervention from 2020 (historical reference). Bideguren supports abolishing all special jurisdiction privileges, including those for politicians, judges and police. This is a historical 2020 intervention, not a new election pledge.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Own Senate intervention from 2020 (historical reference). Castel calls for abolishing special jurisdiction privileges through constitutional and statutory changes, distinguishing this from parliamentary immunity. Historical 2020 evidence.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Junts per Catalunya candidacy manifesto for the November 2019 general election (historical evidence). Its national manifesto retains special court status for political duties while excluding private acts and corruption. It opposes the complete abolition asked about without defending protection for corruption.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Echenique supports removing special political jurisdiction and criticises privileges that bypass ordinary courts, also calling for an end to revolving doors.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

PP parliamentary intervention calling for a national agreement to abolish special court status (2021; historical reference). Jerez supports ending special court status through a broad national agreement and reforming the laws that provide it, so the rules do not depend on the politician’s region. While acknowledging the institution’s legal rationale, he backs abolition and calls for it to apply to all.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Available sources do not establish support or opposition to this proposal. This does not mean the party is neutral.

PSOE: Courts for politicians

Enrique Santiago statement reported by Servimedia. Enrique Santiago supports ending special jurisdiction for officeholders, distinguishing it from immunity. Servimedia reports his anti-corruption announcement.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports abolishing special jurisdiction for national and regional legislators on equality grounds. Historical evidence from 2016.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Fernández supports abolishing special political jurisdiction to restore equality before the law, without procedural privileges for politicians.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Rego’s amendment 28 requires register disclosure of submissions, contacts and meetings by lobbyists obliged to register, including contacts outside draft legislation. His amendments exempt non-profit platforms defending collective rights rather than treating them as commercial lobbyists.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Ana Oramas’s parliamentary lobbying statement (2021). Oramas supports regulating and making parliamentary lobbying transparent. She seeks an exemption for neighbourhood associations and civic groups, rather than rejecting registration of business lobbyists.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Legarda supports transparency, traceability and independent oversight of lobbying. He objects to the decree’s complexity and procedure, rather than the basic public register required by the EU.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Matute supports the mandatory public national register and calls for stronger traceability, intermediary scrutiny and accountability.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Álvaro supports bringing existing Catalan lobbying regulation to the national level, while criticising the decree procedure.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Pagès accepts registration and transparency duties for professional lobbyists and large companies, seeking an exemption for occasional unpaid activity and opposing the decree for failing to distinguish them.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2019 government agreement, section 2.11.4 (historical reference). The PSOE–Unidas Podemos government agreement includes a mandatory public register of lobby meetings and agendas. This is a historical commitment from the 2019 agreement, rather than a new 2026 election proposal.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Proposes lobby regulation and a public record of interests and decisions in each law.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Aceves supports the mandatory public national register, meeting transparency and independent supervision.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Martín Urriza supports a register overseen by the Transparency Council with a public legislative footprint, requiring exclusion of social dialogue.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

UPN parliamentary position in 2017 (historical reference). Salvador supports a Congress interest register and disclosure of meetings with interest groups, explicitly endorsing that transparency alongside support for the reform.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports the whistleblower-protection bill establishing an independent national authority (Law 2/2023, article 42). Evidence of the substantive legislative vote; abstentions are not assigned a stance.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports the whistleblower-protection bill establishing an independent national authority (Law 2/2023, article 42). Evidence of the substantive legislative vote; abstentions are not assigned a stance.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Legarda supports the protection authority with more effective parliamentary oversight. This is a 2023 debate about a specific institution.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports the whistleblower-protection bill establishing an independent national authority (Law 2/2023, article 42). Evidence of the substantive legislative vote; abstentions are not assigned a stance.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports the whistleblower-protection bill establishing an independent national authority (Law 2/2023, article 42). Evidence of the substantive legislative vote; abstentions are not assigned a stance.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Pagès opposes the proposed national anti-corruption body because it duplicates structures and centralises oversight of Catalonia’s Anti-Fraud Office. He supports existing specialist bodies and safeguards against partisan use; opposition to a national body does not mean opposing whistleblower protection and is not inferred solely from a procedural vote.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Supports the whistleblower-protection bill establishing an independent national authority (Law 2/2023, article 42). Evidence of the substantive legislative vote; abstentions are not assigned a stance.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

Postigo criticises creating a new body and proposes existing institutions. This is not opposition to whistleblower protection.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Supports activating the whistleblower protection authority within a national anti-corruption strategy.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto (historical reference). Proposes strengthening the independence, powers and resources of the national whistleblower protection authority.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

UPN’s own amendments 373 and 374 to the national whistleblower-protection bill (2017; historical reference). In their own amendments 373 and 374, Salvador and Alli propose an independent authority covering central government and protecting whistleblowers, with regional participation by agreement. This is UPN’s 2017 national proposal rather than an inference from a vote on the entire bill.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026

2023 general-election manifesto, copy published by RTVE (historical reference). Proposes an independent national anti-fraud and anti-corruption office alongside comprehensive whistleblower protection.

Reviewed: October 7, 2026