A ruling that stops the attempt to silence activism and protects the participation of the group in cases of discrimination
The Constitutional Court has overturned one of the most controversial measures of the reform of the LGTBI Law promoted in 2023 by the government of Isabel Díaz Ayuso in the Community of Madrid. In a historic ruling, the high court has declared unconstitutional the article that prevented LGTBIQ+ associations from appearing in criminal and sanctioning procedures related to cases of LGTBIphobia.
The news has been celebrated by groups such as COGAM, who see in this resolution a clear support for the legitimacy of organized activism as a guarantor of rights and a stop to the institutional attempt to disempower those who have been fighting for equality for decades.
When a reform is a setback
The legal modification of 2023 directly limited the capacity of action of associations that, until then, could appear in judicial proceedings as an interested party when violations of rights due to sexual orientation, identity or gender expression were detected. From the first moment, this reform was denounced for its regressive nature and its apparent intention to make attacks invisible and reduce legal support for victims.
“The Constitutional ruling not only corrects a legal excess. It is also a reminder to institutions: rights are not curtailed,” declared Ronny de la Cruz, president of COGAM. In his words, preventing the appearance of entities committed to human rights left many victims in a defenseless situation and represented “a tortuous setback” that fortunately has already been corrected.
What exactly does the sentence say?
The Constitutional Court, under the presentation of Judge Ramón Sáez Valcárcel, has made it clear that the annulled measure violated the state legal framework, which does recognize the legitimacy of associations to intervene in administrative or judicial procedures in cases of discrimination. This is a legal but also symbolic victory for the LGTBIQ+ movement, which has been the target of political discourses for years that question its legitimacy and usefulness.
Of course, the ruling does not resolve other equally controversial articles of the Madrid reform, such as the one that imposes mandatory psychological reports on trans minors to begin their transition process. An aspect that continues to generate alarm among families, activists and health professionals.
What does this mean for activism?
With this ruling, the Constitutional Court not only returns to associations their role in legal procedures, but also recognizes their value as a tool for democracy. Collectives like COGAM assure that they will continue to act on all fronts—institutional and social—to guarantee that no person suffers discrimination for being who they are.
But there are also voices that wonder if this legal support will be enough in the face of the growing political hostility that some sectors show towards the LGTBIQ+ movement. How long will we have to continue defending what should be guaranteed by default?
