Abstract
The second instance in criminal proceedings has been (and continues to be) a major problem in the Spanish procedural system. After innumerable criticisms from international courts and organizations, Spain recognized the need to establish an appeal that would open the second instance in the criminal justice system and that would allow, from a broad point of view, the review of the conviction by the convicted person.
After several unsuccessful attempts, the establishment of the second instance was set forth in 2015. However, instead of following the classic doctrine which recommended that this appeal should be of an ordinary nature, the aforementioned law introduces a restricted appeal of an extraordinary nature. Faced with this situation, the current Draft Bill for a new Criminal Procedure Act does not improve the situation.
The reason for this decision is the principle of immediacy and its understanding by the ECtHR, and the SCC, essentially stated that a person acquitted in the first instance could not be sentenced in the second instance without having been heard first. This doctrine has weighed on the 2015 reform and continues to do it in relation to the aforementioned Draft Bill since.
The aim of this chapter is to analyse the influence of the doctrine emanating from the ECtHR in relation to the above issue and its reception by Spanish legislation and its courts of justice, mainly from the correct understanding of what should constitute a true second instance in relation to the principle of immediacy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Approved by Royal Decree of September 14, 1882 (Gaceta de Madrid, no. 260. of September 17, 1882.
- 2.
Art. 14.5 ICCPR: “Everyone convicted of a crime shall have the right to his conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law.”.
- 3.
Art. 2 Protocol No. 7 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Strasbourg, 22.XI.1984)
Right of appeal in criminal matters
-
1.
Everyone convicted of a criminal offence by a tribunal shall have the right to have his conviction or sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal. The exercise of this right, including the grounds on which it may be exercised, shall be governed by law.
-
2.
This right may be subject to exceptions in regard to offences of a minor character, as prescribed by law, or in cases in which the person concerned was tried in the first instance by the highest tribunal or was convicted following an appeal against acquittal.
-
1.
- 4.
It should be borne in mind that the classification of a criminal offense, for the purposes of applying the requirement of the double degree of jurisdiction according to the ECHR, does not depend so much on what is established in the state system as on compliance with the Engel Criteria, which emanated from the doctrine of the ECtHR in the judgment of the Engel and others v. the Netherlands, of June 8, 1976. Recently, this court has extended the double degree requirement to administrative sanctioning processes in Spain by application of this doctrine in the judgment of the Saquetti Iglesias v. Spain Case, of June 30, 2020. This condemnation of the Spanish State will pose a problem since there is no legal provision for the double degree of jurisdiction in the contentious-administrative order for all administrative sanctioning proceedings that will have to be legally implemented, but, until then, the successive condemnations that will reach Spain from the Strasbourg Court will have a difficult legal solution for the appellants.
- 5.
See De Lucchi López-Tapia (2002), p. 334.
- 6.
See Montero Aroca (1997), p. 167.
- 7.
See Lara López (2014), p. 195.
- 8.
In Spain, this opinion is not pacific and there are authors who, not without reason, defend that this limitation is contrary to the principle of equality of procedural arms. Calderón Cuadrado (2011), p. 394. And, more recently, and referring to the LECrim Preliminary Draft, Tomé García (2022), p. 1289. For a complete study of this limitation and the divergent opinions, see Lara López (2014), pp. 191–196.
- 9.
The National High Court is a court that has jurisdiction over very specific matters (mainly terrorism and large-scale drug trafficking) and has jurisdiction over the entire national territory. It is composed of certain investigating and prosecuting courts and an Appeals Division. For a more detailed description of the organization of this jurisdictional court, see, among others, Lara López (2017), pp. 78–80.
- 10.
Tomé García (2022), p. 1281.
- 11.
See Agreement of the Non-Jurisdictional Plenary of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of 9 June 2016. Furthermore, this limitation on the grounds of appeal has been endorsed by the Constitutional Court in its First Section Order no. 40/2018, of 13 April 2018. In arguing in favour of the limitation of the grounds, the TC argues that the change in the situation brought about by the 2015 reform of the LECrim, generalising the second instance, means that it is not necessary to extend the grounds of art. 852.
- 12.
Many have made provision for the President of the Autonomous Region to be subject to the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, e.g. art. 117.5 of the Statute of Autonomy of Andalusia.
- 13.
For an exhaustive listing, see Gómez Colomer (2012), pp. 504–507.
- 14.
For all, see De Lucchi López-Tapia (2002), p. 346.
- 15.
The exception provided for in Article 2(2) of Protocol 7 cannot be considered to be an express prohibition.
- 16.
Let us remember that the Supreme Court is the “superior court in all orders, except for the provisions on constitutional guarantees” (art. 123. CE).
- 17.
The latest case has been Communication no. 2844/2016, in the case of Baltasar Garzón v. Spain. On this case see Lascuaraín López (2022).
- 18.
- 19.
See Tomé García (2022), p. 1286.
- 20.
A full survey of possible configurations of the second instance, of which this heading is a schematic summary, can be found at Lara López (2014), pp. 93–148.
- 21.
In the same opinion, and for a development of the objections, see Tomé García (2022), p. 1280.
- 22.
The minor offences trial is a procedure that lacks an investigation phase and whose competence belongs mainly to the Courts of Instruction and the sentence that is passed can be appealed before the Provincial Court.
- 23.
See Lara López (2022), pp. 267–272.
- 24.
(a) Clearly identify those aspects of the factual reasoning which manifestly deviate from the application of rational parameters of argumentation or maxims of experience; (b) identify factual conclusions which have been reached arbitrarily because they are not supported by any evidence; and (c) identify evidence on which reasoning has been omitted, highlighting its relevance to the judgment.
- 25.
Although Tomé understands that the control that today the second instance court can carry out of the evaluation of the evidence that the first instance court has carried out is broader than the model established by the Preliminary Draft of 2020. Cfr. Tomé García (2022), p. 1289.
- 26.
See Hurtado Adrián (2020).
- 27.
STS 185/2019, de 2 de abril (ECLI:ES:TS:2019:1070).
- 28.
See Hurtado Adrián (2020).
References
Calderón Cuadrado MP (2011) La encrucijada de una justicia penal tecnológicamente avanzada: sobre la grabación de las vistas, los recursos y la garantía de la inmediación. Editorial La Ley, Madrid
De Llera Suárez-Barcena E (2007) La apelación contra sentencias absolutórias. Estudios de Derecho Judicial 149:117–129
De Lucchi López-Tapia Y (2002) Nuevas consideraciones sobre el derecho al recurso en el orden penal (el Dictamen del Comité de Derechos Humanos y la jurisprudencia constitucional en el Caso Segundo Marey). Revista de Derecho Procesal 1–3:323–352
Gómez Colomer JL (2012) Sobre aforamientos y principio de igualdad. Revista de Derecho Procesal 1:499–503
Hurtado Adrián AL (2020) Apelación de sentencias (con mayor atención) absolutórias. Diario La Ley, 9638, 22 de mayo de 2020 (electronic resource)
Lara López AM (2014) El recurso de apelación y la segunda instancia penal. Editorial Aranzadi, Cizur Menor
Lara López AM (2017) La organización jurisdiccional española. In: Conceptos de Derecho Procesal Civil. Editorial Tecnos, Madrid, pp 63–90
Lara López AM (2022) Appeals and other remedies. In: The criminal justice system in Spain. Editorial Atelier, Barcelona, pp 259–281
Lascuaraín López JA (2022) El Dictamen Garzón del Comité de Derechos Humanos, en Almacén de Derecho, de 18 de febrero de 2020 (electronic resource), https://almacendederecho.org/el-dictamen-garzon-del-comite-de-derechos-humanos
López Barja de Quiroja J (2010) Tratado de Derecho Procesal Penal. Editorial Aranzadi, Cizur Menor
Montero Aroca J (1997) Los Principios del Proceso Penal: Una explicación basada en la razón. Editorial Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia
Tomé García JA (2022) El recurso de apelación contra sentencias en el Anteproyecto de LECRIM de 2020. In: Reflexiones en torno al Anteproyecto de Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal de 2020. Editorial Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, pp 1277–1305
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Cited Case-Law
Cited Case-Law
ECtHR
-
hudoc.echr.coe.int
-
Ekbatani v. Sweden, no. 10563/83, 26 May 1988
-
Constantinescu v. Romania, no. 28871/95, 27 June 2000
-
Popovici v. Moldova, no. 289/04 and 41194/04, 27 November 2007
-
Bazo González v. Spain, no. 30643/04, 16 December 2008
-
Román Zurdo and others v. Spain, no. 28399/09 and 51135/09, 8 October 2013
-
Gómez Olmeda v. Spain, no. 61112/12, 29 March 2016
-
Atutxa Mendiola and others v. Spain, no. 41427/1413, 13 June 2017
SCC
-
Ruling no.120/1999, 28 June
-
Ruling no.167/2002, 18 September
-
Ruling no. 13/2006, 16 January
-
Ruling no. 2/2010, 10 January
-
Ruling no. 30/2010, 17 May
-
Ruling no. 22/2013, 31 January
SSC
-
Ruling no. 892/2016, 25 November
-
Ruling no. 185/2019, 2 April
-
Ruling no. 358/2019, 10 July
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lara López, A.M. (2023). The Retrial Model in Spain. In: Morão, H., Tavares da Silva, R. (eds) Fairness in Criminal Appeal . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13001-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13001-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-13000-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-13001-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)