Spain’s constitution has carried a 45-year history with a notable change this Thursday: the removal of the word dismised or decreased from Article 49. This term, long deemed outdated and controversial, has been the subject of reform that drew strong debate, yet ultimately received broad support. It marks the third constitutional reform since the document was ratified in 1978, and it is the first to arise from grassroots, social-driven pressure.
The reform responds to a persistent demand from civil society, including the Hispanic Committee of Disabled Representatives CERMI, which aligns with the United Nations Rights of Persons with Disabilities framework established in 2006. While it began as a single amendment, progress required six years and faced opposition from some parties who criticized the approach as hasty. On the steps of the Lower House, the final debate culminated in approval, and observers marked the moment as a milestone for inclusion.
Earlier proposals for constitutional change faced significant technical and political hurdles. Some feared altering the territorial structure of the state or triggering widespread polarization in the Congress of Deputies. Yet reforms achieved in 1992 and 2011 show that constitutional adjustment has been possible when EU requirements push for modernization, even though consensus can be elusive.
Manuel Alcaraz, a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Alicante, described the change as distinctly meaningful. He noted that the reform has a social function and symbolic weight, signaling greater recognition of the dignity of people with disabilities, even if it does not rewrite existing protections dramatically. The moment carries importance for the communities it represents and for the broader public.
Alcaraz also stressed that further work remains. He highlighted the need for broader reforms to the Magna Carta, including the possible inclusion of the Valencian civil code and the removal of outdated barriers affecting citizens. He argued that updating articles related to autonomies would bring the constitution in line with contemporary realities, recognizing that reforming such a foundational document requires careful, incremental steps and wide agreement—an undertaking that contemporary politics may not always ease.
Mar Esquembre, another constitutional law scholar from the same university, called the change modest yet meaningful. She framed it as a step in recognizing not only people with disabilities but also their families and the professionals who support them daily. The reform, she said, is a victory for the broader community. Esquembre emphasized that policymakers must now use constitutional mechanisms more actively to reflect social realities and perhaps push reforms forward more rapidly when possible.
José Asensi, also from the University of Alicante, described the reform as a necessary evolution that keeps pace with society. He pointed to the constitutional text’s rigidity, noting that more reforms will be needed to avoid stagnation. Asensi warned that while broad consensus is essential, the current political climate makes it difficult, underscoring the challenge of moving forward in a polarized era.
Polarization and fear
Experts point to a range of reasons for the difficulties in reforming the constitution. Spain has a history of party conflicts and fears about conceding advantages to others. Some commentators describe a moment of political radicalization that makes reform appear riskier, even when broad agreement is possible. Asensi cautions that democracy cannot be believed to be eroded by cautious, measured steps, and urges a pragmatic approach to progress.
For instance, the previous legislature saw opposition from the Partido Popular to reform efforts. The current proposal, initially submitted by the government and later supported across factions, demonstrates how locked-in positions can evolve with sustained dialogue and a shared sense of necessity.
Esquembre argues that fear of reform’s consequences is unfounded. She notes that the constitution is famously rigid, and amending its framework requires a high level of consensus that can be hard to achieve in a polarized climate. Yet she hopes a broader understanding can extend to other issues needing modernization.
The prevailing fear is not only about change but about the symbolic weight of the constitution. Some observers worry that the document, treated by some as an untouchable symbol, should not become a barrier to practical improvements. Others remind readers that the constitution must eventually reflect the realities of climate change, technological advances, and social progress, even if those issues require careful, incremental changes.
A difficult reform system
One major obstacle is the constitutional reform process itself. Ordinary changes require supermajorities in both houses, and more substantial amendments regarding Title, fundamental rights, or the Crown necessitate a two-thirds majority and a referendum. Experts describe this framework as difficult, if not almost impossible, in a politically fractured environment.
Asensi notes that reform is costly because the text embodies essential principles that must be preserved, yet still allows room to improve. He points out that current provisions related to gender equality in the monarchy need to be clarified to ensure fairness. Beyond this, scholars argue for a comprehensive review of the entire system to address the relationship between autonomous communities and local governments, many of which include outdated references. Proposals from 2005, while not solved, retain relevance and deserve renewed attention.
Compared with other European nations, Spain’s approach to reform often appears more cautious. Esquembre cites Portugal, France, and Germany as examples where frequent, measured reforms have not destabilized the system. Portugal’s constitution, for instance, has undergone several reorganizations in relatively short periods without undermining the state’s stability.
A victory that invites more work
On a historic day for disability advocacy, CERMI and allied groups celebrate the step of removing the term from Article 49, aligning with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Agreements between national leaders in December 2023 and subsequent parliamentary action mark a milestone in aligning the constitution with contemporary human rights principles.
After this breakthrough, disability advocacy organizations stress that goodwill must extend beyond symbolism. They call for accelerated policy implementation to improve quality of life, independence, and genuine participation. CERMI Alicante spokesperson Luis Vañó described the moment as a hopeful turn for the community and urged the development of public policies that match the reform’s intent. Antonio Ruescas of COCEMFE Alicante added that visibility for people with disabilities and their networks must be paired with active measures—accessibility, employment, and equality—so that this reform translates into real benefits.
In sum, the reform signals a commitment to reflect the social reality of Spain while continuing the long journey toward a Magna Carta that serves a diverse, evolving society. The path ahead calls for steady collaboration, practical policy work, and a readiness to revisit foundational questions with openness and pragmatism. The dialogue may be ongoing, but the momentum created by this week’s decision is undeniable and marks a meaningful moment in the ongoing effort to make the constitution a living document that protects dignity for all citizens [citation: CERMI Alicante; UN CRPD 2006].