For the abolition of the revisable permanent prison

The Legal Profession is called upon to make the rights of citizens effective and to ensure respect for the essential principles of the rule of law. The purpose of deprivation of liberty is the re-education and social reintegration of the convicted persons, as established in the Spanish Constitution in its article 25.2. The successive reforms of the Penal Code have hardened the penalties to the point that a maximum of 40 years has been set for particularly serious crimes and the permanent penalty of reviewable imprisonment has also been introduced.

Before the approval of this measure, in 2010, the Abogacía Española He affirmed that criminal policy, like any other, cannot find its justification in the media repercussion of certain criminal acts or in the social alarm that they can arouse. It was stated that the duration of the custodial sentence in Spain is greater than that established in other countries that provide for life imprisonment. In fact, in Spain, a person who has committed different crimes that are not prosecuted in the same procedure, can serve a custodial sentence of more than 40 years, which is their theoretical limit. In short, it was pointed out that it did not seem reasonable to reopen a debate related to security when Spain is the third safest country in the European Union, ahead of many others that include life imprisonment in their legislation, such as Germany, France, Italy or the United Kingdom, the latter with a crime rate double that of Spain. The non-existence of a relationship between life imprisonment or the death penalty and citizen security was affirmed and the need to open an alternative debate on the ineffectiveness of the current penal system to address reintegration was proposed.

CONTRARY TO THE CONSTITUTION

In 2015, once the reviewable permanent prison sentence was approved, by the Consejo General de la Abogacía Española It was reiterated that this penalty was contrary to articles 10, 15 and 25 of the Spanish Constitution. Article 25 is decisive in establishing that custodial sentences must be aimed at the reeducation and social reintegration of convicted persons. Therefore, any penalty that does not fulfill this purpose violates article 15 of the Magna Carta, which repudiates any inhuman or degrading treatment and is contrary to the dignity of the person, the inviolable rights that are inherent and the free development of the personality, collected in article 10 of the Constitution. It was concluded that a measure with such a penitentiary impact should not be approved without a consensus and in-depth debate to justify this criminal hardening.

It has not been thirty years since the 2nd Chamber of the Tribunal Supremo, in Judgment of April 16, 1988, following the debate on long-term sentences, stated that "The legislator should arbitrate more means than those provided by current law for cases of penalties of extraordinary duration, given the pernicious effects revealed by the experts with respect to penalties exceeding twenty years of deprivation of liberty."

In the Latest News, an increase in the cases of permanent prison is proposed, in response to social demand.

From Abogacía Española It must be made clear that the appropriate conditions to increase the assumptions of permanent imprisonment still do not exist, including a serious and in-depth debate in a context of consensus. In the Latest News, the resolution by the Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of said penalty is pending, all political parties are opposed to it -except its proponent- and, in a very majority, the legal and university sectors urge its repeal.

INHUMAN PENALTY

In the Strategic Plan for the Legal Profession, specifically in Axis 2 (objective 2: constitutional guarantee of defense) and as measure No. 54, the promotion of the abolition of the revisable permanent prison is addressed. Specifically, it is recorded that lhe Advocacy is called upon to make the rights of citizens effective and to ensure respect for the essential principles of the rule of law. The penalties of deprivation of liberty are aimed at the social reintegration of the convicted persons, as established in the Spanish Constitution in its article 25.2. The successive reforms of the Penal Code have hardened the penalties to the point that the maximum of 40 years has been set for particularly serious crimes and, in addition, the permanent penalty of reviewable imprisonment has been introduced. Therefore, the Abogacía Española will promote the necessary actions aimed at achieving the abolition of the reviewable permanent prison sentence, which in practice can be assimilated to a life sentence, as it is contrary to the Constitution, since its permanent nature makes it inhumane (Article 15 CE) and its character Reviewable contrary to the requirement of strictness of penalties, the principle of security and, ultimately, the principle of legality (Article 9.3 CE).

 Given the news about the approval of a bill that expands the crimes that can lead to permanent reviewable imprisonment, the Penitentiary Subcommittee of the Consejo General de la Abogacía Española wishes to expressly record its position contrary to the reviewable permanent prison sentence, requesting, once again, its deletion.

This article has been written by all the members of the Subcommittee on Penitentiary Law of the Consejo General of the Legal Profession