Resolution handed down by the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court on 22 February 2022

Non-admission is a legitimate figure of the constitutional-appeal system. What this annex documents is its cumulative effect in this specific case.

The resolution

• Handed down by the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court on 22 February 2022.
• Tenor: non-admission of the appeal (A.30), without examination of the merits of the infringements invoked.
• Basis: the admissibility filter of the constitutional-appeal regime (Article 50 of the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court), which requires justification of the special constitutional significance.

The tally this resolution completes

• Investigating Court No. 8 of Bilbao: no registry or signature comparison on record (A.9).
• Provincial Court: judgment with no assessment of the deeds, the requirement of powers or the inspections (A.26).
• Supreme Court: dismissal of the cassation — comparison pending location in its text (A.29).
• Constitutional Court: non-admission without merits.

Four jurisdictional levels; the documentary comparison — registry dates against proven facts — with no record of examination in any of them.

Is there an ordinary explanation?

The Constitutional Court does not admit the great majority of constitutional appeals: statistically, this non-admission is normal. What statistics do not explain is the complete series: that four successive and independent filters should coincide in not carrying out a check that requires two dates and a calendar. Each link is defensible in isolation; the entire chain is the datum.

How to verify it

Reconstruct the series with the documents: A.9, A.26, A.29 and this resolution. Note, for each level, where the examination of the registry comparison appears. The tally is the argument.

Contrast with the original file

The original order of non-admission appears in Bilbao Original (DOC-0155), with its LexNET notification of 24-2-2022 (DOC-0150): the formula of Article 50.1.b of the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court against the 50+ pages of merits of the appeal (DOC-0153).