Only 91 of 31,000 files under Spain's grandchildren law are valid

Of 31,000 files reviewed under the grandchildren law, only 91 meet the requirements

How many of those naturalized under Spain's grandchildren law actually met the requirements? The Supreme Court ruling notified this October 2026 puts a figure on the suspicion: of 31,390 files already reviewed, only 91 certificates were issued. That's 0.28%. The figure was released by Vox MEP Jorge Buxadé, who called the process a «fraud on the law» and «electoral fraud in installments», and the rest of the discussion has been built on top of it: whether the problem is the law, its management, or the electoral register that comes out of it all.

The starting point used by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is different: 2.5 million applications, of which 600,000 have already been approved and 160,000 people have registered on the electoral roll. The consulates are reviewing at their own pace and, according to a message circulated in the thread, Foreign Affairs would have ordered speeding up the review, cancelling staff holidays and demanding weekend work. The urgency is no coincidence: there is an election on 29N and the Supreme Court has upheld the suspension of the vote for those who already voted in 2023.

What the Supreme Court ruling actually says about the grandchildren of exile

The confusion running through this affair is textbook: one thing is whether the descendants of exile have the right to citizenship, which was approved at the time, and another is how that law is being applied. The Ministry itself, through Ángel Víctor Torres, argues that the Supreme Court's suspension would prevent people who already voted in 2023 from voting, and frames it as an exclusion «for political reasons». The opposite reading is more prosaic: the grandchildren of exile can indeed vote, but they have to prove it. And that is where the loophole lies.

THE OBJECTIVE published the testimony of a worker at the consulate in Mexico describing the real interest of some applicants: getting citizenship in order to come to Spain for surgery. It is not a survey, it is an employee talking about what he sees at the counter. With that material, the debate splits in two: those who believe the problem is the filtering, and those who believe the problem is the law itself.

The electoral roll that comes out of this and why 29N matters

The debate has quickly shifted from the files to the electoral roll. If 160,000 people have registered and the review leaves a validity rate of 0.28%, the inevitable question is how many of those already approved will make the cut. Some are calling for the entire register to be reviewed, not just the grandchildren, and for the election to be suspended if necessary. Others respond with the evidence in hand: if the remaining 99.72% do not have their citizenship revoked, the damage is already done.

The underlying argument is one of comparative electoral law: in Spain, convicted incivil and those not duly registered on the electoral roll are deprived of the vote. The objection to that reasoning is that revoking citizenship already granted is an individual process, not an amnesty in reverse. No one has yet explained how many files will be revoked or under what procedure.

The healthcare cost nobody puts in the spreadsheet

The economic focus of this affair is not the rigged vote, it is the bill. The objection with the most traction in the analysis is that of service consumption: naturalized citizens accessing public healthcare without ever having contributed, and their children and grandchildren, who are also Spanish. The projection being floated —more «Spaniards» abroad consuming services than people contributing at home— has no published model behind it, but it does have a demographic logic that is hard to dispute in the short term.

Add to that the classic fiscal argument: if the net balance of a group is consumer rather than producer, the welfare state is sustained by the taxes of those who remain. The counterargument is that citizenship is not a residence contract and that many of these new Spaniards do not live in Spain. Both things can be true at once.

The open question: review it or cover it up?

The most uncomfortable criticism is not aimed at the PSOE (Spain's Socialist Party), it is aimed at the system: if fraud is confirmed and nobody stops the next one, the problem is not this file, it is the capacity for institutional response. The JEC (Spain's electoral commission) has fined parties and the fines are paid by the taxpayer, so the sanction does not deter. The case is still before the Supreme Court and the consulates are still reviewing. With these numbers, the surprising thing is not that there are 91 valid out of 31,390. The surprising thing is that anyone thought nobody would count up to 91.