Spain: NGOs call on lawmakers not to close the doors to universal justice

Spain: NGOs call on lawmakers not to close the doors to universal justice

The ICJ and other human rights organizations issued a public statement calling on Spanish lawmakers not to pass draft legislation that, if approved, would seriously limit Spanish courts’ ability to investigate and prosecute serious crimes under international law.

The draft legislation, tabled in Parliament by the Popular Party (PP), provides that, for cases involving allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes not occurring on Spanish territory to be investigated and prosecuted in Spain, the suspect must either be a Spanish national or a foreigner habitually resident in Spain or a foreigner who is in Spain, whose extradition has been denied by Spanish authorities.

For case of torture and enforced disappearance, the proposed legislation requires that the suspect be a Spanish national or, alternatively, that the victim be a Spanish national at the time when the crime was committed and that the suspect be present in Spain when jurisdiction is assumed.

Where these conditions are not met, the proposal would allow Spanish courts to hear cases for those crimes for which prosecution is required by international treaties where the suspect is a foreigner on Spanish soil, so long as Spain has received and denied an extradition request.

The ICJ and other organizations stressed in their statement that if enacted, this legislation would close the doors of Spanish courts to certain victims of gross human rights violations who are unlikely otherwise to be able to obtain justice, particularly within their own jurisdictions.

Spain-Universaljurisdiction-NGOsJointStatement-2014-eng (download the joint statement in English)

Spain-Universaljurisdiction-NGOsJointStatement-2014-SPA (download the joint statement in Spanish)

Spain: ICJ welcomes European Court ruling in Del Rio Prada case

Spain: ICJ welcomes European Court ruling in Del Rio Prada case

The ICJ welcomes today’s ruling by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Inés Del Rio Prada, affirming that changes made retroactively to the remission of her sentence violated her rights.

The ICJ, which intervened as third-party in the case, says the judgment reinforces and makes effective the principle of non-retroactivity of criminal law, an essential element of the rule of law.

“This is a highly significant judgment that affirms and strengthens the rule of law in criminal sentencing,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme. “Rules and practices that have a significant impact on the calculation and remission of sentences must not be applied retroactively to the detriment of a convicted person.”

“The key principle that the Grand Chamber has upheld today is that the rules that apply to the calculation of the sentence to be served, must be clear and foreseeable under the law at the time of conviction. Subsequent re-interpretation by the courts cannot fundamentally revise the principles that apply to a sentence already handed down. While States have the responsibility for setting sentencing rules for crimes, any changes to those rules which would result in an increased penalty must not applied retroactively in breach of (Article 7 of) the European Convention on Human Rights,” she added.

BACKGROUND:

Inés Del Rio Prada had been convicted of terrorism offences and sentenced to a total of over 3,000 years of imprisonment.

According to Spanish sentencing rules in force at the time, this theoretical sentence was tantamount to an effective sentence of 30 years imprisonment.

While at that time, the benefit of sentence reduction for work performed in prison was applied to the 30-year period, in 2008 the Spanish courts decided to deduct such benefits from the 3,000 years of nominal imprisonment instead, thereby significantly reducing their impact, and leading to a considerably longer sentence in the case of the applicant.

In its judgment, the Grand Chamber held that the application of changes to Spanish sentencing rules as applied to applicant Inés Del Rio Prada had violated the prohibition on retroactive penalties guaranteed in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It held that a 2006 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court, which altered the system of calculation of maximum terms of sentences, leading to reduced remission of sentences for work done in prison, constituted a retroactive redefinition of the sentence previously imposed, which could not have been foreseen.

As such, the Court held that Spain had violated its obligations under article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

The Court also found that the applicant’s continued detention violated the right to liberty under Article 5(1) ECHR, and required her release at the earliest possible date.

Contact:

Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, t +32 2 734 8446; e-mail : roísín.pillay(a)icj.org 

Read also:

Third Party Intervention in Del Rio Prada v. Spain

 

 

 

Spanish Supreme Court urged to proceed with case against former US officials accused of facilitating torture

Spanish Supreme Court urged to proceed with case against former US officials accused of facilitating torture

The ICJ and others argue that Spain should assume jurisdiction, as the US has allowed for impunity of top officials who facilitated torture.

The ICJ joined the Center for Constitutional Rights, the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights and other leading organizations and scholars, arguing that the Spanish Supreme Court should reopen the investigations for participation in or aiding and abetting torture and other human rights abuses against six senior legal officials of the Bush Administration.

The brief argues that Spain should exercise jurisdiction under Spanish law because the US itself has failed to carry out any meaningful investigations and prosecutions against the officials, who are alleged to have provided legal authorisation for torture practices against “war on terror” detainees.

The officials are David Addington (former Counsel to, and Chief of Staff for, former Vice President Cheney): Jay S. Bybee (former Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ); Douglas Feith (former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Department of Defense (DOD); Alberto R. Gonzales (former Counsel to former President George W. Bush, and former Attorney General of the United States); William J Haynes (former General Counsel, DOD); and John Yoo (former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, OLC, DOJ).

SpainUSA-Bushlawyers-AmicusBrief-2012-eng (download third party intervention)

Translate »