Criminal Proceedings in the Spanish Judicial System
Lesson 1: Criminal Proceedings
1. The Criminal Process: Purposes
The criminal process serves its own distinct purposes within the judicial system.
2. Effectiveness of Criminal Proceedings
The effectiveness of criminal proceedings is crucial for maintaining order and justice.
3. Criminal Justice System: The Spanish System
This lesson focuses on the Spanish criminal justice system.
4. Structure of the Criminal Process
The criminal process is structured in phases: instruction, intermediate, trial, appeal, and execution.
5. Principles of Spanish Criminal Proceedings
This section details the principles underpinning Spanish criminal proceedings.
References
Lessons 1 and 2 of the Moreno Catena Manual provide further information.
Paragraphs 1 and 2
Refer to the Moreno Catena Manual for these paragraphs.
Paragraphs 3 and 4: Basic Structure
A. Investigative Phase
In our judicial order, an investigative phase is necessary. A natural event becomes known to the investigating body (coroner). It is often essential to carry out measures to understand the event and its circumstances, allowing for potential prosecution.
Article 299 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPP) outlines measures to prepare the trial, identify the crime, and determine the circumstances affecting its qualification and the guilt of offenders, ensuring their apprehension and financial responsibilities.
Preparing for Trial:
- Formal Indictment: A formal claim of conviction reviewed by the judge. It requires concrete details of the events and cannot proceed without sufficient data to qualify the act under criminal types and rules governing elements of crime, applicable to the defense.
- Guarantees Against Unfounded Trial: The system prevents unfounded trials. Trial begins only when there is evidence of a crime against a specific person, ensuring accurate data for further accusation and judicial assessment.
- Conflict of Interest and Rights: Addresses potential conflicts of interest or rights of the responsible or accused parties. Includes measures impacting fundamental rights, personal or economic relief, victim protection, and public interest in concluding the criminal action, along with occupation effects.
- Process Positions: Defines the roles of suspect and accused, allocating rights and procedural powers, targeting the process (acts) and persons subject to it.
- Differences Between Ordinary and Abbreviated Procedures: Minor differences exist between the two common crime processes. The key distinction lies in the allocation formalities (processing) in the ordinary process. The abbreviated process is shorter, with a streamlined investigation focusing on essentials. Generally, there is no evidence presented in the process for minor offenses (faults).
B. Intermediate Stage
In this stage, parties formally present accusations and apply for a court order, defining the trial.
Trial of the Accused: Judicial control is exercised over the opening of the trial, allowing for early dismissal if appropriate.
Key Differences Between Procedures: The competent organ exercising judicial control differs (abbreviated: before and after accusations; ordinary: after). The powers of the controlling authority also differ (abbreviated: no link with allegations; ordinary: only 637.2).
Procedural Issues: The ordinary procedure addresses procedural issues at this stage, while the abbreviated procedure does so during the trial.
C. Trial Phase
Conducted by the instructing body (criminal court, hearings).
Principles of public access, orality, concentration, immediacy, and party contribution apply.
Uniformity exists between both crime procedures.
True evidence is presented.
Allegations are definitively added to the legal process, guaranteeing the right to defense.
A sentence is always delivered.
D. Execution Phase
The sentencing judge orders execution ex officio (Article 117 of the Spanish Constitution). The judge decides on alternatives to imprisonment (replacement, suspension), duration, and termination (including parole).
The supervising judge monitors prisoners’ rights, resolves conflicts with prison administration, and manages the sentence or security measure, controlling the sentenced individual’s progress and approving proposed remedies or consequential assumptions (grade progression, probation, maintenance, modification, or elimination of custodial safeguards).
Party statements are restricted to the supervising judge.
6. Mixed Instruction: Inquisitive and Accusatory
Inquisitive Instruction: The Judge of Instruction is responsible for monitoring and promoting the investigation, opening the investigation, charging, and practicing prosecution, including impacting fundamental rights, regardless of party proposals. This principle is limited regarding precautionary measures (detention).
Accusatory Principle in Trial: Judicial neutrality prevails, with parties initiating the establishment of factual and legal prosecution purposes and providing evidence.
7. Guarantees and Basic Principles of Criminal Law
Right to Due Process (Article 24.2 of the Spanish Constitution)
Need for Public Officers: The public interest in punishing crimes necessitates the initiation of proceedings upon knowledge of apparently criminal facts, driving procedural momentum.
Accusatory Principle: Requires a conviction claim by someone other than the decision-making body. Relaxes misconduct at trial due to informality (Article 969.2: stating facts is equivalent to an accusation if the Public Prosecutor does not intervene).
Individuals involved in investigative functions cannot be decision-makers, ensuring judicial impartiality.
The accusatory claim defines the scope of the criminal conviction.
The accusatory claim also defines its legal scope. The defense cannot impose a penalty beyond the specific request, punish for a crime other than the one prosecuted (unless consistency exists), or impose a more serious penalty than the crime subject to prosecution.
The interaction of formality and adversarial principles necessitates the Public Prosecutor’s role in urging the exercise of ius puniendi through the charge, particularly in parastatal or private crimes.
Equality of Arms: Defendants and defense have equal means of argument, evidence, and challenge. Full effectiveness is achieved at trial, with some imbalance favoring the defense, whose activity is less circumscribed than the prosecution’s, which is subject to trial limitations arising from pre-qualification.
Necessary and justified inequalities exist in the investigation stage. The Public Prosecutor is involved from the outset, while the accused enters when the process is directed against them, potentially after the initial statement. Proceedings are secret, never affecting the Public Prosecutor but potentially subjecting the accused to measures impacting their rights and precautionary measures. The accused is subject to the proceedings, while the Public Prosecutor is not.
Some legislative inequality exists in the intermediate phase, with unnecessary procedures in some cases (e.g., deciding on trial opening without hearing the defense on complementary measures).
Presumption of Innocence
A trial rule requiring minimum and valid in-court proof to invalidate the presumption. Reflected in the right to remain silent, not confess guilt, and not self-incriminate.
The defendant must be treated as innocent until the proceedings conclude, justifying the exceptional nature of interim measures restricting freedom and rights.
In dubio pro reo applies when minimum and valid evidence exists but is insufficient for conviction.
Publicity (Article 120.1 of the Spanish Constitution)
Essential in the trial phase, ensuring parties’ full knowledge of proceedings (with nuanced restrictions: protected witness identity, undercover agents). Trials are held publicly, with coverage where necessary and limited restrictions when protected interests concur. Guarantees are provided for the accused and society (power control).
In the preparatory phase, proceedings are accessible to the parties but not others. Secrecy may be temporarily restricted for parties, except for the prosecution.
Orality (Article 120.2 of the Spanish Constitution)
Primarily governs the trial, where evidence is presented through testimony and documents are read (Article 730). In pre-trial and intermediate phases, written documentation prevails. Written submissions also generally prevail in appeals.
Immediacy
Guarantees the accused’s defense, requiring the presence of incriminating evidence during trial, either physically or through presented records (read statements, author statements, reproductions). Mandates the accused’s presence at trial, with legal exceptions (minor offenses, absence in summary proceedings).
Allows for pre-constituted evidence in certain acts due to its probative value.
Guarantees the decision-making body’s knowledge, requiring direct contact with trial evidence, limiting resources that could negatively alter the defendant’s assessment of evidence dependent on immediacy (Constitutional Court Judgment 167/2002).
Trial Without Undue Delay (Article 24.2 of the Spanish Constitution)
Article 324 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary establishes weekly updates for parties, with prompt conclusion within a month if no summary is requested. Abbreviated procedures are conducted without delay (Article 779.1), prioritizing urgency and simplicity.
Delays in final decisions reduce decision quality, negatively impact evidence reliability, harm victims, impair prevention and punishment goals, and create a sense of impunity.
Corrections include limiting criminal prosecution or punishment, analogous attenuation (Article 21.6 of the Criminal Code), and pardon.
Right to Defense
Knowledge of Attributed Acts (Article 118 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary): Upon admitting a complaint, defendants are immediately notified of the alleged crimes. Similar principles are established in Articles 771.2 and 775 for abbreviated procedures.
Requires knowledge of the accusations made.
Acquiring imputed status through a judicial decision during instruction is a precondition for becoming a defendant. The identity or acts charged must be clearly defined.
Upon acquiring imputed status, the right to intervene in the case arises (formulating allegations, appealing instructor decisions, proposing and intervening in measures) with legal assistance, crucial for consequential acts (judicial declaration, identity findings) during instruction and trial opening.
Specific legal and case law security exists regarding protective measures, evidence, and fundamental rights impacts.
Includes the right to oppose allegations, offer further evidence, participate in incriminating evidence practice with a chance to contradict it, and present defense arguments.
Right to a Reasoned Sentence: Knowing the decision’s rationale allows for reaction and demonstrates democratic power, preventing arbitrariness and enabling social control of state power.
Right to Appeal Any Conviction (Article 14.5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)
Right to Freedom
A paramount legal system value.
Limitations on rights before the final sentence are governed by necessity, guardianship preservation, and legal interest proportionate to the imposed sacrifice.
Justifies actions preserving due process rights or legitimate interests (e.g., exemptions from reporting or testifying duties).
Judicial Guarantee
Constitutional Court’s Exclusive Decision-Making (Article 117.3 of the Spanish Constitution): Courts direct and control the investigation stage based on legal criteria, despite party intervention.
Right to a Predetermined Judge (Article 24.2 of the Spanish Constitution): Legal rules predetermine the competent court for each procedural phase.
Impartiality of the Judge: Mechanisms of abstention and recusal ensure impartiality.