A review of the doctrine of the Constitutional Court on the relationship between articles 2 and 168.1 EC, in light of its parliamentary work

Abstract

The jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court is quite clear regarding the absence of material limits to the reform of the EC78. And the vast majority of our country’s doctrine has followed that line of understanding that no intangibility clause is included in our Constitutional Text. It is argued, mainly, that article 168.1 provides for a procedure for the total reform of the Constitution and that, in addition, during the constituent process an amendment aimed at incorporating into that same precept the unchangeability of the territorial integrity of the State was rejected. The purpose of this work is to compare this jurisprudence of our Constitutional Court with the detailed analysis of the parliamentary work of the precepts involved. We understand that, in light of this, one could at least question whether the rejection of that amendment necessarily leads to the conclusion that the will of the constituent was not to establish any express material limit to the reform of the EC78, as has been stated.