I was very disappointed at the recent conviction of Baltasar Garzon. It was the equivalent of a head of a horse delivered to every judge in Spain.
We can already see part two of this playing out in the trial of Urdangarin, where the CGPJ (the same friendly folks that suspended Garzon) have opened disciplinary proceedings against the judge without any real evidence.
There’s a host of problems with the recent conviction of Garzon at the hands of the Supreme Court of Spain. The fact that the Supreme Court managed to convict someone all by itself without any determination by a public prosecutor that a crime occurred should make anyone nervous.
There may be some issues that could be appealed to the Constitutional Court, but given the unanimous verdict of the Supreme Court, it’s obvious that in Spain, the wagons are being circled.
The European Court of Human Rights may provide an interesting route of appeal, since as part of the European Convention of Human Rights, anyone convicted of a crime has the right for the conviction to be reviewed by a higher tribunal. It's not clear that the Constitutional Court would qualify, since its mandate is only to review constitutional issues, not to act as a court of appeal.