According to a report from Iberian Lawyer, a Madrid administrative court has dismissed a legal challenge against the Madrid Bar Association (ICAM). The challenge targeted an institutional statement from November 2023 in which ICAM expressed concern over a political agreement between Spain’s PSOE and Junts parties.

ICAM’s statement had warned that the agreement’s references to “lawfare” and the potential for parliamentary scrutiny of judicial rulings threatened the separation of powers and judicial independence. The court’s ruling affirmed that ICAM’s statement was lawful, fell within its statutory duties to defend the rule of law, and did not violate the principle of institutional neutrality.

Our Take

This ruling highlights a critical distinction in the debate over institutional neutrality. The 451 Institute defines this as an institution refraining from partisan positions unrelated to its core mandate. Here, the court correctly identified that defending the justice system, a critical institution, from political manipulation is not a partisan act; it is the fulfillment of the Bar Association’s own core mission. When political agreements threaten to subordinate core missions (like impartial justice ) to partisan objectives, institutions designed to protect the rule of law have a duty to speak. This is not politicization; it is an essential check and balance. The court’s decision reinforces the idea that true neutrality means defending the integrity of the institution itself against political disruption.