Skip to content

Where are you from?

Choose your province and we will tell you how the deputies and senators you elected vote, one by one.

 

We remember it in this browser. If you create an account, we keep it there.

Type a law, a topic, a person or a province.

What it is

Proposal to limit lockdowns and change judicial review of health measures

Admitted step 2 of 7 · Rejected

It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 5 August 2020. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Popular en el Congreso.

Official title: Organic Private member's bill on the protection of health and of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000077· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The proposal seeks to protect health without cutting back rights as much as happened under the state of alarm, and to give public authorities clear tools against pandemics.
  2. The bill would amend organic law A law on fundamental rights, the electoral system or other matters the Constitution reserves. It needs an absolute majority in the Congreso: 176 votes. 3/1986 to spell out the available health measures: observation, quarantine, isolation, treatment, contact tracing, and controlling or limiting entry, exit and movement within an affected area. All measures would have to follow the principles of necessity, suitability and proportionality.
  3. The bill would provide that courts only need to authorize or ratify health measures that deprive someone of freedom or another fundamental right, not those that merely restrict them. The words 'o restricción' would be deleted from Article 8.6 of the procedural law.
  4. Restrictions on fundamental rights ordered by the autonomous communities for health reasons would be reviewed under the special procedure for protecting fundamental rights, and measures adopted by the Government would be reviewed by the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court.
  5. A new procedure would be created for seeking judicial authorization when the health authority bans entry to or exit from a territory or limits freedom of movement. The judge would rule within 24 hours after hearing the Public Prosecutor, and the measure would last 15 days, renewable for another 15.

Who it affects

  • The general public: Health measures restricting their freedom of movement would be limited and they would have stronger judicial safeguards.
  • Health authorities: They would have a clear list of measures against contagious diseases, including sealing off areas.
  • Contentious-Administrative Courts: They would only authorize or ratify measures that deprive someone of freedom or another fundamental right, not those that merely restrict them.
  • Autonomous communities and the Government: Their rights-restricting public health acts would be reviewed under a specific judicial procedure.

Words worth knowing

Proposición de ley
A bill introduced by a parliamentary group. It is not yet an approved law.
Ley Orgánica (Organic Law)
A special type of Spanish law, harder to pass, reserved for major matters such as fundamental rights.
Estado de alarma (state of alarm)
An exceptional situation allowing the Government to temporarily limit rights, as happened with the lockdown.
Jurisdicción Contencioso-Administrativa
The courts that review whether acts by public authorities are lawful.
Acción popular (popular action)
Allows any citizen to go to court over a matter, even if they are not directly affected.
organic law
A law on fundamental rights, the electoral system or other matters the Constitution reserves. It needs an absolute majority in the Congreso: 176 votes.

It summarizes the text as it was introduced. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries

Where it stands

How far did it get?

It took 2 of 7 steps. It reached Admitted, and today it is rejected.

  1. Introduced5 August 2020Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted2 September 2020The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
  3. Amendmentsnot reachedGroups propose changes.
  4. Committeenot reachedA committee goes through the text in detail.
  5. Plenarynot reachedAll 350 deputies vote.
  6. Senatenot reachedThe Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
  7. BOEnot reachedIt is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 6 official steps on a timeline
Aug 2020Sept 2020Oct 202011. 5 August 2020: Presentación22. 2 September 2020: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 02/09/2020 hasta 07/09/202033. 2 September 2020: Calificación44. 7 September 2020: Gobierno Contestación desde 07/09/2020 hasta 14/10/202055. 14 October 2020: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 14/10/2020 hasta 17/11/202066. 17 November 2020: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 17/11/2020 hasta 23/11/2020

17 November 2020

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 98 yes · 249 no · 1 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill of the Popular Parliamentary Group in the Congress, Organic Law on the protection of health and of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 2 of sitting 59· updated 11 Nov

Each dot is a seat. Tap one, or use the arrow keys, to see who it is.

Your province

How did the deputies from your province vote?

And your senators: the Senate does not link its votes to this law in its open data, so we cannot put them side by side here.

Or see how most of each province voted
More details: how each group and each province voted

The groups

Who voted in favour and who against?

In favour, most of Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Mixto and Popular en el Congreso. Against, most of Euskal Herria Bildu, Republicano, Socialista, Ciudadanos, Gcup-ec-gc, GPlu, Sin grupo and VOX. 4 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 2 most voted in favour; in 42, against.

Coloured by how most of each province’s deputies voted.

  • In favour: 2
  • Against: 42
  • Tie: 8
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Euskal Herria Bildu5
5 against
Republicano13
12 against · 1 did not vote
Socialista120
120 against
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)6
6 in favour
Mixto9
4 in favour · 3 against · 1 abst. · 1 did not vote
Ciudadanos10
10 against
Gcup-ec-gc35
35 against
GPlu12
12 against
Sin grupo1
1 against
Popular en el Congreso88
88 in favour
VOX51
51 against

What happens next

What happens now?

It goes no further. A similar one could be introduced later.

Sources

Where does all this come from?

  • The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
  • Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
  • We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.