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 let the regular courts review Court of Accounts rulings

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 20 January 2022. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Plural.

Official title: Private member's bill reforming Ley Orgánica 2/1982, of 12 May, on the Court of Auditors and Ley 7/1988, of 5 April, on the Functioning of the Court of Auditors.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000197· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would allow appeals against the Court of Accounts' judicial decisions to be filed with the administrative litigation courts, instead of limiting review to the narrow cassation and review appeals now available before the Supreme Court. Its rulings could then be fully reviewed by a court that is part of the judiciary.
  2. The Court of Accounts' Adjudication Chambers would decide at first instance the account trials, the reimbursement proceedings and the bond cancellation files.
  3. The Accounts Counselors would handle the investigation of reimbursement proceedings, and the figure of the Investigating Delegate would disappear.
  4. The cassation and review appeals set out in the Law on the Operation of the Court of Accounts would be repealed, along with related articles and transitional provisions.
  5. The text justifies the change because the Court of Accounts depends on the Cortes Generales and its members are not judges, which the bill says conflicts with the right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Who it affects

  • People who handle public funds or property and may face accounting liability: They could appeal the Court of Accounts' rulings to a court within the judiciary.
  • The Court of Accounts and its Accounts Counselors: The roles of its bodies would change: the Chambers would judge at first instance and the Counselors would investigate proceedings.
  • The judiciary, specifically the administrative litigation courts: They would hear second-instance appeals in Court of Accounts matters.

Words worth knowing

Reintegro por alcance
Proceeding to require someone to return public money or property they were responsible for and failed to account for.
Jurisdicción contable
The function of judging the liability of people who manage public funds.
Recurso de apelación
Appeal allowing a higher court to review a case already decided.
Casación y revisión
Extraordinary appeals only available in very limited cases and for specific grounds, not for a full review.
Orden contencioso-administrativo
The branch of the judiciary that reviews the actions of public administrations.

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. Introduced20 January 2022Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted25 January 2022The 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
Jan 2022Jan 2022Feb 2022Feb 2022Feb 202211. 20 January 2022: Presentación22. 25 January 2022: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 25/01/2022 hasta 28/01/202233. 25 January 2022: Calificación44. 28 January 2022: Gobierno Contestación desde 28/01/2022 hasta 15/02/202255. 15 February 2022: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 15/02/2022 hasta 22/02/202266. 22 February 2022: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 22/02/2022 hasta 28/02/2022

22 February 2022

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 71 yes · 265 no · 1 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill by the Plural Parliamentary Group, to amend Organic Law 2/1982, of May 12, on the Court of Auditors, and Law 7/1988, of April 5, on the Functioning of the Court of Auditors.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 2 of sitting 153· updated 10 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 Euskal Herria Bildu, Republicano, Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Gcup-ec-gc and GPlu. Against, most of Socialista, Mixto, Ciudadanos, Popular en el Congreso and VOX. 3 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 7 most voted in favour; in 44, against.

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

  • In favour: 7
  • Against: 44
  • Tie: 1
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Euskal Herria Bildu5
5 in favour
Republicano13
13 in favour
Socialista120
118 against · 2 did not vote
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)6
6 in favour
Mixto10
2 in favour · 5 against · 1 abst. · 2 did not vote
Ciudadanos9
7 against · 2 did not vote
Gcup-ec-gc34
33 in favour · 1 did not vote
GPlu12
12 in favour
Popular en el Congreso88
85 against · 3 did not vote
VOX52
50 against · 2 did not vote

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.