Iustitia Europa: Claims 11.4% in Madrid Amidst Signature Drive

Iustitia Europe: The 11% Poll and the Battle for Signatures

A party that was recently just a legal entity filing lawsuits now claims **11.4% of voting intention in Madrid** in a poll commissioned by itself. Released during the signature collection for the November 29 general elections, this figure sparked debate: is it electoral data or a tool to raise funds and members? Luis María Pardo’s formation asserts various polls give them three to four seats in Madrid, while skeptics often reply with one word: "0.1%."

The case has a peculiarity that makes it uncomfortable for everyone. **Iustitia Europe began as a popular prosecution machinery** in corruption cases, not as a traditional party apparatus, and its jump into electoral politics relies solely on declared funding from member fees and donations. This explains both the enthusiasm of some and the distrust of others.

From Courts to the Ballot Box on November 29

The sequence is verifiable. The formation ran in the 2024 European elections and needed **7,500 endorsement signatures** for the general elections, a requirement under Spain's Electoral Law (LOREG) that supporters call a deliberate barrier against small parties. Collection was done against the clock, urging people to gather five signatures among family and friends and send them via urgent mail to an address in Madrid’s Chamartín district. They succeeded: the candidacy was registered as the eighth in Madrid.

Meanwhile, polls arrived. According to data released by the formation itself, **NC Report projected four MPs** and an estimated 8.6% vote share, with 18.4% potential vote contingent on voter familiarity with their proposals; Target Point attributed three seats, and DYM also four. The internal reading is that, due to the D'Hondt method in Madrid, each seat costs less than it seems, and even one MP from Pardo reduces PSOE’s representation.

Why Does Almost No One Believe the 11.4%?

The problem isn't arithmetic, but traceability. A double-digit percentage for a brand most voters couldn't place on the political spectrum requires an explanation the poll doesn't provide: how many respondents knew the party before answering. Campaign materials admit that the **18.4% potential vote** depends on prior knowledge, making the range resemble a laboratory exercise.

Distrust worsens due to timing: the figure emerges while signatures and donations are being collected. Some argue the poll is marketing for recruitment; counter-arguments note the formation has been acting as popular prosecutor in corruption cases for months, work invisible in polls but legally significant. Both can be true simultaneously.

Clash with Vox and the Protest Vote Split

The hottest point is vote transfer. The formation rejects the "useful vote" thesis, arguing **Iustitia Europe takes votes from no one** because it targets abstainers and voters disillusioned with PP and Vox, accusing the latter of tacitly accepting regular immigration and ignoring the Immigration Law (LOEX). Opponents claim any new party running in Madrid fragments the space and gives away seats.

The deeper critique goes beyond vote splitting. Part of the conservative electorate believes presenting Justice as a savior against the political class whitewashes a judicial system they see as part of the same post-1978 regime. This is the most uncomfortable criticism for a party whose main asset is precisely the courts.

Signatures Secured and What Remains

The candidacy got the signatures and will run. That is a fact no poll can dispute. What remains to be seen is whether the 11.4% was a floor, a ceiling, or simple propaganda: the answer won't come from polls, but from the November 29 count. Meanwhile, the formation has already proven something many small parties fail to do for years: transitioning from courts to ballots without a traditional apparatus.