The decision by the Supreme Court to dismiss the appeal filed by the Madrid City Council against the annulment of certain articles of Madrid’s Sustainable Mobility Ordinance has become more than just a legal triumph for Vox; it has ignited a fierce internal battle for leadership and narrative control within the party. This development highlights a deeper, long-standing organic conflict between Santiago Abascal, the national leader, and Javier Ortega Smith, a co-founder and until recently a prominent figure in the party.
The Deepening Rift: Abascal vs. Ortega Smith
The conflict between Abascal and Ortega Smith is not new. It began in 2022 with Abascal progressively removing Ortega Smith from internal positions, including his role as Secretary-General and spokesman in the Congressional Justice Committee. The culmination was Ortega Smith’s definitive expulsion from the party last week, a decision now heading to the courts. However, the recent judicial victory against car restrictions in Madrid has provided a new arena for this power struggle.
Both sides are leveraging their internal resources to dominate the media narrative. The national leadership is using its social media channels to promote Arantxa Cabello as the new interlocutor in Madrid. Cabello has been tasked with replacing Ortega Smith, a move that requires the majority support of a municipal group largely loyal to Ortega Smith.
Meanwhile, Ortega Smith’s team is utilizing the municipal group’s resources to lead the message. On the day the Supreme Court’s decision was announced, Vox’s official national channel declared, “Almeida has lost” and “must return the money from the fines and let the people of Madrid live in peace once and for all.” This was accompanied by a video featuring Cabello, a clear attempt to position her as the face of this victory.
Ortega Smith’s Counter-Narrative and Accusations of Self-Promotion
Ortega Smith’s camp responded swiftly. Through their WhatsApp channel for journalists, they relayed the municipal group’s complaint, voiced by Ortega Smith himself. Notably, he expressed “heartfelt thanks” to the “constancy, coherence, and legal solvency of the municipal group and each of its members, without excluding anyone, as the judicial success is also theirs.” This statement, according to municipal sources speaking to ABC, is seen by some as an attempt by Ortega Smith to “take credit, when he is the only one who hasn’t worked for it.”
Furthermore, the municipal group’s X (formerly Twitter) account announced that Ortega Smith would bring an urgent motion to the next Cibeles plenary session on April 29. The motion demands that the Madrid City Council return the money collected from fines for accessing low-emission zones, following the annulment of the mobility ordinance by the courts. The group’s post, featuring Ortega Smith, declared, “Since 2019, the freedom of movement for the people of Madrid has been a fundamental pillar for us. We celebrate the success achieved, but this is not over yet. Every euro collected must be returned to the pockets of Madrid residents.”
Critics argue that as the official spokesman, Ortega Smith still “holds all the cards” and can continue to lead the charge, despite the likelihood of the PP rejecting his motion due to their absolute majority.
The Clock is Ticking: Plenary and Judicial Battles Ahead
This power play between the national leadership (Bambú) and Ortega Smith’s loyalists has a short-term deadline in the Cibeles plenary and a longer path in the courts. The immediate focus is on the Madrid City Council’s decision regarding the municipal group’s status following the expulsion of three councilors-Ortega Smith, Ignacio Ansaldo, and Carla Toscano-from Vox.
The presidency of the Cibeles chamber has requested from Vox the detailed steps taken to expel Ortega Smith and the two other councilors. Faced with the responsibility of deciding the future of the municipal group, the Secretary-General of the Plenary has asked the national leadership for the complete expulsion file. Ignacio Garriga, Vox’s Secretary-General, has five days, starting last Friday (meaning until this Thursday), to respond to this request. As of Wednesday evening, the documentation had reportedly not been sent, delaying any decision on the municipal group’s situation.
The judicial path is still unfolding. Ortega Smith, a co-founder of Vox, has announced a joint lawsuit with the other two expelled councilors against the party’s “arbitrary” decision. “We are not going to give up; we do not accept arbitrariness or injustice,” Ortega Smith declared earlier this week. It was the day after this statement that the battle to lead the narrative, specifically concerning the fight against car restrictions, truly began.
Broader Implications: Political Priorities and Urban Planning
This internal conflict within Vox, fueled by a local victory, underscores a broader tension in Spanish politics regarding urban planning, environmental regulations, and political priorities. The debate over low-emission zones touches upon issues of individual liberty, public health, and economic impact, making it a potent symbol for political maneuvering.
The Madrid car restriction saga, now intertwined with Vox’s internal strife, serves as a case study in how local policy decisions can reverberate through national political landscapes, exposing fault lines and power dynamics within parties. The outcome of both the plenary session and the legal battles will not only shape the future of Vox in Madrid but also offer insights into the evolving strategies of political parties in addressing urban challenges and public discontent.
The question remains: who will ultimately claim the narrative victory in this complex interplay of legal decisions, political maneuvering, and internal party struggles? The answer will likely influence not only the future of Vox but also the broader discourse on urban mobility and environmental policy in Spain.
