The Spanish Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional the legal provision that allowed political parties to collect personal data relating to citizens’ political opinions in the context of electoral activities. The decision is a key reference for privacy, political profiling and democratic rights.
The ruling concerned article 58 bis of the Spanish Electoral Law, introduced through the 2018 Data Protection Act. The Court considered that the provision did not provide the safeguards required when a law affects fundamental rights.
In this article we will discuss...
Why political opinions are sensitive data
Political opinions are special category data under the GDPR. Their processing is generally prohibited unless a specific legal exception applies and appropriate safeguards are in place. This higher protection exists because political profiling can affect freedom of ideology, participation and democratic debate.
What the Constitutional Court said
In its official note, the Constitutional Court explained that the provision was declared unconstitutional and void because the law was insufficiently precise and lacked adequate safeguards.
The judgment was later published in the Spanish Official Gazette. The case is important because it confirms that political communication cannot justify broad or vague collection of sensitive personal data.
What political parties may still do
Political parties can continue to communicate with voters within the limits of electoral and data protection law. However, they cannot use vague legal language to build ideological profiles or infer political opinions without clear safeguards and a lawful basis.
Lessons for organisations
- Special category data requires stronger legal analysis.
- Publicly available information is not automatically free to process.
- Profiling can seriously affect fundamental rights.
- Legal bases must be specific, proportionate and documented.
- Transparency and safeguards are essential when processing sensitive data.
Why this still matters
The case remains relevant because political profiling, big data and online advertising continue to raise privacy risks. Any organisation using personal data to segment, infer preferences or influence behaviour should assess whether its practices are lawful, transparent and proportionate.
Conclusion
The ruling confirmed that political opinions cannot be treated as ordinary marketing data. In democratic societies, the use of personal data for political purposes must be especially limited, transparent and protected by strong safeguards.