Catalonia at a Crossroads

With both sides in the Catalan dispute seeing the world from mutually exclusive perspectives, says Daniel Cetra, there is no clear way of finding a way forward. 
This is yet another significant episode in the greatest constitutional crisis in Spain since the restoration of democracy. 
There is a deep polarization both within Catalonia, between supporters and opponents of independence, and between Catalonia and the rest of Spain. Two distinct worldviews have grown apart over the Catalan quest for self-determination and independence that started in 2012 – and have been driven further apart by last October’s referendum and declaration of independence, Spain’s subsequent direct rule, and the events of recent days.
The majority view in Spain is that this is a legal issue. Catalan leaders broke the law and need to pay the legal price. This is the view of the Spanish government, led by Mariano Rajoy’s Partido Popular (PP), as well as the opposition Socialists (PSOE) and Ciudadanos (C’s). It is also the perspective of the majority of public opinion.
By contrast, the majority view in Catalonia is that this is a political issue. The last two elections returned a pro-independence majority in the parliament, and the claim is that Spanish institutions are not respecting the democratic mandate of the people and are abusing judicial powers for political purposes, including the jailing of political opponents.
These diametric opposed worldviews ensure that both camps have mutually exclusive takes on the events unfolding in Catalonia and across Europe. In addition, neither side has much in the way of an incentive to deescalate the situation.
The PP and C’s are battling each other to be seen as the greatest defender of state unity. The Socialists are fighting a rear-guard action on the same territory, desperate to avoid losing votes by seeming accommodating. Within Catalonia, rival parties – Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), Carles Puigdemont’s electoral platform Junts Per Catalunya (JuntsxCat), and Partit Demòcrata (PDeCat) – are also in a fight for the leadership of the independence movement.
In terms of the constitutional dispute between, rather than within, those two groups, the quest for independence was defeated last autumn.The declaration of independence passed by the Catalan parliament did not result in a break with Spain and so was, ultimately, a symbolic gesture or perhaps even a rather empty one. 
In addition, the pro-independence camp is disorientated and divided between those supporting a moderate roadmap focused on restoring Catalonia’s political autonomy and those defending continued disobedience.
However, the Spanish Government seems determined to continue to fight a battle it has already won. The Spanish institutions would do well to refrain from attempting to humiliate the Catalan movement and instead seek a political solution
The hopes for a negotiated settlement face another hurdle however. All of the main Catalan leaders are either in jail or exile. There are therefore no obvious interlocutors to enter such a dialogue and neither are their obvious leaders of the movement to develop new strategies and chart a new course.
The current round of arrest warrants and the series of events that preceded it have also done very real damage to the notion of the courts as neutral arbiter. Indeed, Spain now runs the risk of crossing the line between the rule of law, in which judges hold the ring of political dispute, to the rule by law, in which judicial powers are abused for political ends.
Solving this crisis requires a nimble political intelligence that has so far been absent. It also requires both sides to recognise each other as a legitimate political interlocutor and a recognition of past mistakes. Independence parties unwisely adopted a maximalist strategy (declaring independence unilaterally) without a clear democratic majority. The Spanish response of treating this issue as a legal challenge, as opposed to a legitimate political demand that needs to be addressed politically, did nothing to resolve the crisis.
It remains to be seen whether both sides have it in them to set aside the mistakes of the past and find a path forward. 

Comments policy

All comments posted on the site via Disqus are automatically published. Additionally comments are sent to moderators for checking and removal if necessary. We encourage open debate and real time commenting on the website. The Centre on Constitutional Change cannot be held responsible for any content posted by users. Any complaints about comments on the site should be sent to

Daniel Cetrà's picture
post by Daniel Cetrà
University of Aberdeen
27th March 2018
Filed under:

Latest blogs

  • 16th August 2018

    A week after the state of intergovernmental relations (IGR) in the UK was highlighted by the UK government’s law officers standing in opposition to their devolved counterparts in the UK Supreme Court, the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee published a report on improving IGR after Brexit. Jack Sheldon discusses the methods by which England could gain distinct representation — something it currently lacks — in a new IGR system.

  • 10th August 2018

    Brexit is re-making the UK’s constitution under our noses. The territorial constitution is particularly fragile. Pursuing Brexit, Theresa May’s government has stumbled into deep questions about devolution.

  • 8th August 2018

    The UK in a Changing Europe has formed a new Brexit Policy Panel (BPP). The BPP is a cross-disciplinary group of over 100 leading social scientists created to provide ongoing analysis of where we have got to in the Brexit process, and to forecast where we are headed. Members of the UK in a Changing Europe Brexit Policy Panel complete a monthly survey addressing three key areas of uncertainty around Brexit: if —and when—the UK will leave the EU; how Brexit will affect British politics; and what our relationship with the EU is likely to look like in the future. The CCC participates on the Panel.

  • 2nd August 2018

    The House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee issued its report ‘Devolution and Exiting the EU: reconciling differences and building strong relationships’. Discussing its contents, Professor Nicola McEwen suggests that the report includes some practical recommendations, some of which were informed by CCC research. It also shines a light on some of the more difficult challenges ahead.

  • 31st July 2018

    The politicisation of Brexit, combined with deteriorating relations between London and Dublin, has created a toxic atmosphere in Northern Ireland, says Mary Murphy, which will require imagination and possibly new institutions to resolve.

Read More Posts