The Supreme Court has annulled for lack of justification the exclusion of bullfighting from the scope of application of the Youth Cultural Bonus.
The Chamber has upheld the contentious-administrative appeal filed by the Fundación Toro de Lidia against Royal Decree 210/2022, of March 22, by which it demands the regulatory norms of the aforementioned Bonus and annuls the expression "and bullfighting" in its article 8.2.
Article 8 in its section 2 established that bullfighting shows, in addition to sports, together with the acquisition of stationery products, curricular textbooks (printed or digital); computer and electronic equipment, software, hardware and consumables, artistic material, musical instruments, fashion and gastronomy.
cultural manifestation
The Court explains that it is not up to it to decide whether bullfighting, in general, and bullfighting shows, in particular, are cultural manifestations, since it has been the same legislator who has done so in the affirmative, as Law 18 clearly explains. /2013 for the regulation of bullfighting as cultural heritage. add that the Constitutional Court has also made clear that same cultural nature of bullfighting, which the challenged Royal Decree does not deny, but rather, on the contrary, assumes that it has that nature and, therefore, must expressly suppress them.
The conclusion is that the court is that neither in the file nor in the text of Royal Decree 210/2022 itself, as highlighted by the lawsuit, are there reasons that explain the exclusion. "The ones offered by its preamble do not seem valid for this purpose and that it only says that bullfighting shows are promoted through other instruments and that each Administration has the capacity to decide the sectors or activities of public interest or utility that it promotes and in what way. He does it”, says the sentence, presentation by magistrate Pablo Lucas.
For the Chamber, these generic explanations, however, are "insufficient" when there are specific legal provisions that impose on public authorities the obligation to act positively in a given area, such as bullfighting.
For this reason, it considered that the specification given by Law 18/2013 to the mandate of articles 44 and 46 of the Constitution included the need for "a singular justification of sufficient entity for why bullfighting shows are left out of the Youth Cultural Bonus" .
The Chamber affirmed that it does not find this justification in the other exclusions included in article 8.2 of Royal Decree 210/2022 either, since there is no identity or connection between them that allows us to deduce the reason for the exclusion that concerns us, therefore, without questioning the relevance that each one has, it happens that with respect to the others there is no legal recognition like the one that does exist with respect to bullfighting in its cultural, historical and artistic dimensions”.
The ruling refers to the fact that the State Attorney insists that the General State Administration does comply with its obligation to promote Bullfighting, as evidenced by initiatives such as (i) the annual National Bullfighting Prize of €30.000; (ii) the grant of €35.000 to the recurring Foundation for the compilation of knowledge and artistic, creative and productive activities integrated into Bullfighting; (iii) the "Cultures of the Bull" project of actions to identify, document, investigate, value and transmit the cultural heritage linked to bullfighting, articulated in the project "Cultures of the bull in state museums" consisting of small virtual exhibitions of three have been published and another is in preparation; (iv) the exhibition "The bullfighting memory: bullfighting photos in the state archives" of the two exhibitions held (Salamanca and Seville) and another is being prepared in Sanlúcar de Barrameda.
The Chamber responds that, even understanding that these initiatives -which are those already listed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Report- refer to the preamble of Royal Decree 210/2022 when it alludes to the autonomy and capacity of the Administrations for what to choose and how to promote culture, is to decide, accepting that they are not characteristics a posteriori, "it does not seem to us, however, that they help to correct the lack of justification for the exclusion for the simple reason that they are punctual".
On the other hand, it emphasizes that "the consistency of the Youth Cultural Bonus has a general projection and, in addition, it may require qualification as it addresses a new generation, that is, it looks to the future represented by young people -according to the opinion of the Council of State almost 500.000 – perspective that is fundamental when it comes to the conservation and promotion of cultural heritage. There is not, therefore, between the actions outlined and the Youth Cultural Bonus -which meant 210 million euros for the city memorial- the necessary proportion to conclude that bullfighting was given a balanced treatment with the importance that is recognized to the legislator."
