Spain's Supreme Court gives government five days to list 163,020 affected voters

A five-day deadline

Spain's Supreme Court has given the government five days to hand over a nominal list of the 163,020 people affected by its precautionary suspension of voting rights for citizens naturalised under the so-called 'grandchildren law'. Two court orders, reported by Europa Press, are addressed to Justice Minister Félix Bolaños and Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares. The list must reach the court's contentious-administrative chamber, the Central Electoral Board and the Electoral Census Office by 28 October 2026. If the ministers miss the deadline, the court warns it may impose a coercive fine or pass the case to prosecutors over possible criminal liability. The order of 23 October sets that fine at 1,000 euros for now, and a referral could open a disobedience inquiry before the court's criminal chamber.

Ministries say consulates are working through the weekend

Foreign Ministry sources said on Friday, 23 October, that the department had ordered consulates to work on Saturday, 24 October, and Sunday, 25 October, to meet the deadline. Staff leave and holidays were suspended, and every request for extra personnel from consulates was approved, the ministry said. Bolaños said the ministry had already instructed consulates to provide the names. Albares has acknowledged that completing the process on time will be 'very difficult' given the narrow margin, while insisting the foreign service is complying scrupulously with the order. The government says the names of only a minority of digitised files have reached the Electoral Census Office, and that the remaining cases must be checked one by one.

Consulates are behind on a file-by-file review

Sources at the Foreign Ministry said by Tuesday, 20 October, that only 32 of Spain's 157 consulates had sent information, in whole or in part, about the affected citizens. The consulate in Frankfurt has finished and sent its full file, according to Violeta Alonso Peláez, president of the Consejo General de la Ciudadanía Española en el Exterior, while Rosario sent its data on Monday, 19 October, after dedicating all its resources to the task. Some consulates handle 700 or even 1,500 people a day, which leaves little room for the review. Around 80% of the cases are concentrated in 16 consular offices, and many files are not digital. The Abogacía del Estado warned in every filing since the Supreme Court suspended the vote on 8 September that the measure was almost impossible to carry out.

Court challenges and the Constitutional Court

ILOCAD, the law firm led by former judge Baltasar Garzón, has filed a nullity incident before the Supreme Court to press for urgent reversal of the precautionary measures. The firm acts pro bono for three affected people. On 21 October the Constitutional Court declined to admit an amparo appeal from the Ombudsman, ruling it premature by 10 votes to 2 because the judicial route had not been exhausted. The deadline for affected people to file arguments before the Supreme Court fell on Thursday, 22 October. In its statement, ILOCAD said:

The aim is for the Supreme Court to rule now

The firm argues that suspending voting rights has been excluded from the legal system since 1995, when it could only be imposed individually by a final criminal ruling.

Political fight over the 29 November vote

Óscar López, minister for digital transformation and civil service, told TVE that the government would deploy every resource needed to comply with the court. He said:

The government will do everything possible to guarantee the right to vote and to comply with court rulings.

López blamed Vox for the 'colossal mess' its complaint against the norm has created for the justice system, and accused the PP of jumping on Vox's bandwagon. He recalled that Alberto Núñez Feijóo had earlier championed the foreign vote. A legal commentary in El Confidencial argues the affair could erode the legitimacy of the 29 November result whichever way the Supreme Court rules. The Supreme Court still has to decide whether to lift the measure after hearing the parties.