The cathedral authorities clearly are just giving up on "quality control" and handing out Compostelas to whomever wants one. A lot fewer headaches, no quizzes or requirements, and the Xacobeo/Xunta people who seem to call the shots lately can congratulate themselves with all the inflated numbers of "pilgrims."
The Compostela has become just a souvenir, but they've made it more meaningless than ever.
Lots of parallels to be drawn here, but I'll leave it to you all.
I don't understand why anyone would seek or accept a Compostela if they do not sincerely believe that the description in the text of the Compostela, as quoted, applies to them: being of "the faithful and pilgrims" ... "who, for devotion or by taking a vow have come to the Church of the Apostle Santiago" and "devoutly visited this most holy temple for reasons of piety". Likewise if they do not believe that the organisation conferring it "with the seal of the same Holy Church" has the authority to do so.
How many kilometers one may have walked, or what means of transport they may have used to get to Santiago is, on the face of it, entirely without relevance.
The document means what it says. If this description does not apply to you, or you don't believe in the organisation that confers it, why on earth would you want one? If you do accept one, and its contents are false in relation to you, you might as well go on to Bangkok and buy a Harvard PhD. It would be just as empty of meaning.
I think the time may have come to have two versions of the Compostela. The original, quoted above, and another, whose text says something that is true of the person accepting it. This alternative Compostela could also contain whatever stipulations as to how, and how far, one has journeyed to Santiago. The original might require no verification other that the implied word of honour of the recipient, since its authenticity is beyond objective verification. The alternative could be verified by credentials or sellos or any other proofs considered appropriate.
Each person who presents themselves atvthe office could be offered both, and it would be up to them which they accepted. The original might be free, but open to donation, to avoid the sin of simony. The alternative could have a standard fee.
Consider it as a blue pill or a red pill. Choose the truth, either way.
Why get a dog licence if you don't own a dog? Or vow "till death us do part" if you hold in your heart the possibility of divorce? Declare what you mean, mean what you declare. Hold to your pledged word. Or who exactly do you think you are trying to fool, and why?