Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/1071

(Case C-666/24)

(C/2025/1071)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Prosecuting parties: Ministerio Fiscal, Associació Catalana de Víctimes d’Organitzacions Terroristes (ACVOT), Asociación de Víctimas del Terrorismo (AVT), Asociación Dignidad y Justicia, Asociación Española de la Guardia Civil (AEGC), Asociación Unificada de la Guardia Civil (AUGC) and Partido político VOX

Defendants: EGB, EGC, GTA, SPG, QCR, ACB, JRS, RJDL, FJG, XBLL, DBA and CBE

Questions referred

1.Must Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which prohibits the prosecution of and, as the case may be, the imposition of criminal penalties on, those who actively participate in the activities of a terrorist group, thereby extinguishing their criminal liability?

2.Must Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA, specifically Article 13 thereof, be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which prohibits the prosecution of and, as the case may be, the imposition of criminal penalties on, those who actively participate in the activities of a terrorist group, thereby extinguishing their criminal liability, by laying down an additional requirement for the purposes of punishment, to the effect that, in addition to participation in a terrorist group, those persons must actually and intentionally have caused serious breaches of human rights?

3.Must Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which, in respect of the terrorist offences and offences related to a terrorist group laid down in that directive, draws a distinction according to whether or not those offences actually and intentionally caused serious breaches of human rights, such that that distinction makes it possible for some of those terrorist offences or offences related to terrorism to be exempted from criminal liability?

4.Must the principle of legal certainty in EU law, which is enshrined in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which makes the exemption from criminal liability through the amnesty for persons accused of conduct capable of falling within the scope of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA subject to the condition that they must not have intentionally caused serious breaches of human rights, in particular the rights governed by Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and international humanitarian law, without stipulating which acts constitute such infringements or the threshold of seriousness which must be passed in order to render the amnesty inoperative? Alternatively, are the principles of legitimate expectations and legal certainty in EU law incompatible with a rule, such as that contained in Article 1 of Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which sets vague objective and subjective parameters for determining whether or not criminal liability has been established?

5.Must Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which prohibits the prosecution of and, as the case may be, the imposition of criminal penalties on, those who manufacture, possess, acquire, transport, supply or use explosives for terrorist purposes, thereby extinguishing their criminal liability?

6.Must Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which prohibits the prosecution of and, as the case may be, the imposition of criminal penalties on – thereby extinguishing their criminal liability – those who, for terrorist purposes, commence violent acts by setting targets for extensive destruction on the grounds that those targets represent a conflict with the ideology of the terrorist group, by the performance of surveillance or by the photographic documentation of public places to destroy – in particular, premises of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, State law enforcement authorities, autonomous institutions, and police vehicles – all with a view to ensuring the full execution of the violent plan devised by the terrorist group, with the aim of successfully carrying out that destruction?

7.Must the principle of primacy of EU law, which is enshrined in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the principle of cooperation in good faith laid down in Article 4(3) TEU be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which exempts from criminal liability through the amnesty persons accused of conduct which falls within the scope of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA?

8.Must Article 20 and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which exempts from criminal liability through the amnesty persons accused of criminal acts in Spain which fall within the scope of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA, by reason of the ideological aim pursued through those criminal acts?

9.Must Article 4(2) TEU and Articles 20(2)(a) and 21(1) TFEU be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Organic Law 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia, which, through the amnesty, exempts persons accused of terrorism from criminal liability on the grounds that the acts concerned were committed with the aim of segregating part of the national territory of that Member State?

—

(1) OJ 2017 L 88, p. 6.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1071/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—