The EU Justice Indicators Chart for 2026, analyzed by Agenda Pública on June 10, reveals the deep distrust Spaniards have in the independence of their courts and tribunals, which they consider highly politicized. Two surveys published this week in two of the main newspapers, 40dB. for El País and Ipsos for La Vanguardia, have probed this social discontent with the judicial system. And the results obtained have fallen like a bucket of cold water on the major judicial associations within the magistracy. These professional groups, which systematically oppose any judicial reform by labeling it an attack on independence and an attempt at politicization, have found that suspicions about the partiality of judges and magistrates multiply in the half of the country that votes for the left. The judiciary is only perceived as impartial among voters for the PP and Vox. And not by everyone.
Trust in Justice in Spain Begins from a Low Baseline
That social distrust in the independence of judges and the perception of politicization and volatility before the major economic powers could be attributed to the Government of Pedro Sánchez is a fallacy that the data disprove. The first EU Justice Indicators Chart was published in 2013, when the ruling party was the PP and its president, Mariano Rajoy. That initial edition placed Spain mid-table for the first and only time. In 16th place among the Twenty-Seven. Very far behind Germany, but close to France and above Italy or Portugal. From 2014 onward, our country sits at the back among European partners on this specific metric, never surpassing 19th place and reaching the penultimate, 26th.
That social distrust in the independence of judges and the perception of politicization can be attributed to the Government of Pedro Sánchez is a fallacy that the data debunk.
This Monday, the Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS) has provided the most recent data on that perception. The body chaired by José Félix Tezanos has released a preview of results from its IV Estudio sobre la calidad democrática. Almost eight in ten respondents consider that justice is not equal for the rich and the poor, and nearly 90% believe that judges treat a politician differently than any other citizen. Regarding cases involving political parties, 77% believe that justice is often not impartial in these matters. The initial results also yield another interesting finding: 87.5% of those surveyed believe that the state’s current mechanisms to combat corruption are not sufficient to tackle this phenomenon.
Why Ideology Divides Judicial Confidence
But who exactly are the ones behind this discontent? Precisely those who perceive the judges as predominantly conservative in ideology: voters who support left-wing parties, though not exclusively. A 34% of respondents in the El País survey believe that the judiciary tends to favor the right, while 16% think it favors the left. In the face of that partisan perception — of one bias or another — that 50% of the population acknowledges, only 27% consider that the judges are impartial. The belief that judges’ decisions are fair and independent is a majority view only among PP voters. The vast majority of left-leaning party voters, on the contrary, believe that their political views influence their decisions.
That the decisions of judges are fair and independent is a majority option only among PP voters.
Ipsos, the French multinational of public opinion and market research that conducted the survey published by La Vanguardia, asks respondents to what extent they agree with the statement “There are judges who are doing politics and politicians who are trying to do justice.” Without introducing voting as a variable, almost six in ten are “somewhat in agreement” with that phrase, versus two in ten who are “somewhat in disagreement.” Among PSOE voters, those who agree are almost eight in ten —almost nine in ten among those in Sumar—, a share that drops to four in ten among PP voters. Among Vox supporters, the proportion of those who believe there are judges who engage in politics is higher than for the center-right party. That is supported by 54% of its followers.
This negative public perception of judicial independence arrives amid enormous conflict between the judges and the Sánchez government. The major associations have not only boycotted the main reforms proposed, some also defended by the PP while it was at the helm: the limitation of popular action —the main focal point of the courts’ politicization—, the handing over of the investigation of criminal cases to prosecutors, or the democratization of the entry system to the career, facilitating candidacies from applicants with fewer resources or introducing a practical test in the opposition.
All of this with a broad political critique. That all these initiatives were only defending PSOE interests or aiming to appoint judges favorable to that party. Under Sánchez, the three judicial associations have gone so far as to sue their own country before the European Commission with the aim of being sanctioned for infringing the separation of powers and the rule of law, as in Viktor Orbán’s Hungary or PiS Poland. A year ago, they even summoned a strike that the very body governing the judiciary deemed illegal.
The major associations have boycotted the main reforms proposed, some also defended by the PP while it was at the helm of the Government
The Commission’s reports assess independence from that subjective citizen perspective, but also from a perspective called structural or objective. And there, Spain meets all the procedures and guarantees of a first-rate democracy. The Venice Commission and the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), as well as EU rule-of-law reports and OECD ones, do not detect structural problems in the Spanish judicial system, though they recommend some improvements. Neither the EU Court of Justice nor the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have questioned the strength of Spanish democracy, which year after year, the The Economist‘s Democracy Index rates as “full” and places at the level of Germany, the Netherlands or Austria and above other partners such as France, Belgium or Italy.
Nevertheless, judges, courts, and judicial systems do not only need to be independent because of all those mechanisms, checks, and balances. They must also appear to be independent. The public’s confidence in the independence of the judiciary —perceived or subjective independence— is vital for the exercise of the fundamental right to effective judicial protection, enshrined in the Constitution and in the Union treaties. The guarantee of that right not only requires “to ensure that legal procedures are fair”. According to the EU Justice Indicators Chart prepared this year by the Commission, it is also essential “the confidence of citizens and businesses in the legal system”. Restoring it is a task that falls to the Government, the Parliament, and the Council, yes, but also to all those who daily expose themselves to society by exercising jurisdiction.
