A historic decision by the Constitutional Court
In a ruling that marks a milestone in housing policy in Spain, the Constitutional Court has dismissed the appeal presented by the Government of the Community of Madrid against Law 12/2023, which establishes the right to decent housing. This decision, which comes after several previous challenges, reinforces the State's powers to regulate fundamental aspects related to housing and guarantees equitable access for all citizens.
The Madrid Government Council had argued that several articles of this law encroached on its exclusive powers regarding urban planning and housing. However, the Court concluded that the State has the necessary authority to define housing as a subjective right and to establish who its beneficiaries are. This approach seeks to ensure that all Spaniards can exercise this right without discrimination.
Upon learning of the Court's ruling, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Agenda expressed its satisfaction, highlighting that this ruling supports mechanisms aimed at intervening in the real estate market. According to ministerial sources, it is crucial for autonomous communities to implement this law to combat speculation and ensure a proper social function of housing.
“The law is fully constitutional and works,” officials from the Ministry stated, urging communities to collaborate rather than obstruct government initiatives.
The ruling not only reaffirms the rights of Spanish citizens but also opens the door to extending these rights to foreign residents in Spain. The Court argued that this is part of the legitimate exercise of the State to guarantee basic conditions necessary for all. This aspect is fundamental given the growing number of foreigners living in Spanish territory.
“Equality in the exercise of the right to housing is essential,” one of the judges emphasised during the deliberations. The decision is based on key articles of the Spanish Constitution that allow the state legislator to regulate these rights.
In addition to dismissing much of the appeal presented by Madrid, the Court also declared the subsequent loss of object regarding provisions already deemed unconstitutional previously. This means that some arguments presented by Madrid have become obsolete due to prior decisions related to this same law.
It is worth noting that five judges expressed their disagreement with certain aspects of the ruling through dissenting votes, reflecting internal tensions within the Court on this highly controversial issue.
You may also like
