The Regulation on the consultative referendum

This week, the “Regulation on the Consultative Referendum in the Principality of Andorra” was published, with “only” a 3-year delay (will they now also say that they had to wait for who-knows-who in the Union to give the go-ahead to who-knows-what? Do they show such subordination towards the EU?) for “the forthcoming holding of a consultative referendum on the association of the Principality of Andorra with the European Union”, as stated at the beginning of its Statement of Reasons.

As this is the hour of truth and there is no longer any time for empty promises, the text makes it perfectly clear, both in the title, in the first sentence of the Statement of Reasons (although statements of reasons in a legal text do not have binding force, they do help to interpret the rule) and, above all, in several provisions of its articles (which constitute the binding part), that the referendum will be CONSULTATIVE and that, therefore, an eventual negative result could not be brought before the courts if the institutions were ever to disregard the popular will directly expressed in the referendum.

What does this Regulation, which has taken so long to draft, actually contain?

Well, nothing that had not already formed part of our legal system for years.

Let us begin at the beginning, with points 1, 2 and 3 of Article 1, which I reproduce:

“1. Suffrage is universal, free, equal, direct and secret.
2. The right to vote belongs to all Andorran citizens of legal age, in full enjoyment of their civil and political rights, who are duly registered on the electoral rolls (...)
3. Persons convicted by a final court judgment to the principal or accessory penalty of deprivation of the right to vote do not have the right to vote for the duration of their sentence.”

And what do points 1, 2 and 3 of Article 1 of the Qualified Law on the Electoral System and Referendums say?

Exactly the same:

“1. Suffrage is universal, free, equal, direct and secret.
2. The right to vote belongs to all Andorran citizens of legal age, in full enjoyment of their civil and political rights.
3. Persons convicted by a final court judgment to the principal or accessory penalty of deprivation of the right to vote do not have the right to vote for the duration of their sentence.”

(Note 1: registration on the electoral rolls is provided for in Article 2 of the aforementioned Law).

(Note 2: the Qualified Law on the Electoral System and Referendums dates from the year of the Constitution, 1993.)

And so it goes throughout the entire text.

Article 2 of the “new” Regulation is literally Article 33 of the Law on the Electoral System and Referendums:

“Voting is carried out personally or by proxy at the polling station assigned to the voter or by judicial deposit at the Batllia. Voting by judicial deposit at the Batllia may be carried out in person or by post.”

Article 3 of the Regulation is merely a direct reference to that Law.

Article 4 partially reproduces Article 27 of the Law.

Article 5 consists of Articles 41 and 42 of the Law.

Article 6 is Articles 21 and 23.

Article 7 is Article 25 and Article 8 is Article 30 (literally).

Article 9 is Articles 42 and 43.

The text of Articles 12 to 21 corresponds to that of Articles 38 to 49 of the Law, Article 23 to Article 50, and Articles 24 and 25 to Article 45 of Law 43/2022, of 12 December, consolidating the Qualified Law on Political Parties and Electoral Financing.

So, what has this “new” Regulation actually contributed?

Noise, more noise, more empty gestures in an extremely long process in which, for the time being, the 2023 electoral promise of direct democratic participation by the Andorran people in a “binding” referendum is being blatantly breached.

Instead of promoting a Law that would add the promised “binding” nature to the referendum, it is being “replaced” by a government Regulation — thus avoiding the need for the General Council to intervene and once again avoiding debate in the open — which makes it perfectly clear that the referendum would be merely “consultative”.

Yet another broken promise in a process filled with many empty words and few tangible actions.