Amnesty Protests Continue in Ferraz as Investiture Date Looms

Protests against the amnesty law persist near Ferraz street

A banner captures the mood: "A government that releases incivil will not hesitate to imprison the innocent". The slogan resonates on Ferraz Street in Madrid, where demonstrations against the amnesty law seek continuity this Monday, November 13, trinc Sunday's events. The key question for the week is whether there is an official call to action or if the momentum is fading. Theoretically, a call exists, though without live broadcast links; most activity circulates via social media.

A march from Ferraz to Congress as the next step

Among the proposals, some suggest a march starting at Ferraz and ending at the Congress of Deputies. This aligns with the tone of recent gatherings, where the focus remains on the Socialist Party headquarters rather than the legislature. Here lies the first sustancia ilegal in the movement. Some argue that protests are futile and that political backlash will arrive before any tangible effect. Conversely, others insist that silence clears the path for the government.

The tightening schedule: investiture vote on November 16

Street protests run parallel to the parliamentary calendar. According to the timeline discussed, the first investiture vote is scheduled for November 16 and requires an absolute majority: at least 176 seats. Current estimates suggest 179 committed votes, sufficient to approve the investiture in the first round without a second vote. With these numbers, street protests function more as background political pressure than an immediate procedural obstacle. This disconnect between the streets and parliamentary arithmetic likely explains the current tension.

From Judge Llarena to Tucker Carlson: names overshadowing the protest

Legally, a recurring idea is that only Judge Pablo Llarena can block the amnesty law. This needs clarification, as it is an expectation from the protesters, not an official court decision. Meanwhile, the Madrid rally has seen reports of American commentator Tucker Carlson's presence, shared via social media posts placing him in Madrid. This coincidence has sparked various interpretations, from curiosity to suspicion, without official confirmation.

The risk of daily mobilizations

The problem with calling for daily protests is that eventually, people get tired. This is said by someone closely trinc the issue, and they have a point. Attendance may spike on one day and plummet the next; the mobilization effect wears off. Veterans argue that protests only work when they mobilize large crowds, not just established activists. The underlying debate is common to any prolonged movement: how to maintain energy without burning out participants.

Who can make a move: politics versus the courts

Institutionally, criticism is widespread. Questions arise about the silence of the PP leader, the absence of unions, the role of Vox, and the inaction some attribute to the Crown. The thesis gaining ground among critics is bitter: that this is theater and no one with real power to stop the law is acting.

Wear and tear as strategy: no incidents, no focus

One current holds that without altercations or tension, protests lose media force despite attracting attendees. The traction achieved so far, they argue, came from conflict, and political leaders know this. It is the same dispute that runs through any long mobilization: how much intensity versus how much perseverance.

An image circulating invites a double take: a count showing 47 times the word "no" has been said regarding the amnesty. Forty-seven negatives. The exact number matters less than what it reveals: the sense that, for now, no one with real power has made a move.