Sun. Mar 29th, 2020

United We can take your law back to Congress on Tuesday to repeal the maximum deadlines to instruct summaries

The Congress already approved in May 2017, with the vote against the PP, the consideration of this same proposal by Podemos and its confluences to repeal the reform carried out by the PP in 2015 of article 324 of the Lecrim.

However, this initiative suffered up to 67 extensions of the deadlines for submitting amendments without even taking off. Subsequently, the dissolution of the Congress on the occasion of the electoral advance condemned the processing of this proposition as that of so many others.

The text of those of Pablo Iglesias, which will foreseeably be taken back into consideration next week by the majority of the Congress, consists of a single point that pursues the repeal of the new article 324 of the Lecrim promoted by the PP.

The aforementioned article set a standard period of six months for the investigation of criminal cases. He added that, before the expiration of this ceiling, the instructor, at the request of the Prosecutor's Office, may declare the investigation "complex" if due to unforeseen circumstances it cannot be closed within that period. If that happens, the period for the investigation will be 18 months, although the judge may extend for another 18, also at the request of the prosecutor.

That deadline of instruction allowed the former president of Murcia Pedro Antonio Sánchez, of the PP, was acquitted of the 'Pasarelas case' because the magistrate allowed six months to pass without taking a statement and the Prosecutor's Office asked for a late declaration of complex cause to be able to extend the term.


The confederal group justifies the presentation of its legal reform in which the investigation deadlines of summaries cannot be shortened without increasing the means available to the Administration of Justice.

As they argue, not doing so amounts to introducing "serious difficulties" for the investigation of crimes to be completed within the planned deadlines, which they believe would have "special impact on the more complex instructions," such as those of large property crimes, of fraud and corruption, and organized crime.


In addition, they argue that the system established by the PP "does not prevent the so-called 'bench penalty' and may even favor the prosecution of the prosecution against any person without having been able to complete the investigation of the facts.

"The other option is the dismissal, with the consequent impunity of facts among which it is possible to intuit that the most serious ones, sanctioned in the Penal Code, will be included, since they are the most difficult investigation," United We can in the statement of reasons of its reform.

They also argue that the reform of the PP produces "legal uncertainty" and recalls that even the former state attorney general, Consuelo Madrigal, warned that the establishment of these periods in the instruction raised "areas of gloom" and that associations of Judges and prosecutors also criticized her.

. (tagsToTranslate) United (t) We can (t) Congress (t) instruct (t) summaries

Source link