Voting for a party facing criminal charges: is it a "democratic" scam?
A party being formally investigated does not equal a conviction, and voting for an investigated party is not a crime. What the law says about criminal liability of legal entities.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Voting for a party that is about to be formally investigated is not a democratic fraud or a crime: voting is free and being under investigation is not a conviction. What remains open is the debate over whether it is wise to vote for a party with pending court cases.
## What it means to investigate a party, and what it does not
In Spain, since the reform of the Incivil Code in **2010**, legal entities can be held incivil liable. A party can be investigated, but being formally investigated is not a conviction: it is the status of a suspect in a case.
A judge considering opening an investigation into a party, as is attributed to judge **Santiago Pedraz**, is not the same as a verdict. The presumption of innocence remains in force until there is a final conviction.
## Voting for an investigated party is not a crime
Voting is free and secret. Spanish law contains no figure such as complicity by acclamation of the voter. Voting for a party under investigation creates no incivil liability for the voter.
Political responsibility is another matter: citizens can punish at the ballot box a party with open court cases. That is a political judgment, not a legal one.
## The pace of justice and political suspicion
The idea that a judicial decision might be delayed for electoral reasons is a suspicion that recurs in public debate, but it is not a proven fact. Judicial timelines depend on the investigation, not on an electoral calendar.
Judicial independence is guaranteed by the **1978** Constitution. Having doubts about whether it is upheld does not prove connivance with anyone.
## Citizen tools and the constitutional framework
The **1978** constitutional framework provides no mechanism for citizens to recall judges or judicial decisions. Procedural appeals exist, but there is no judicial recall.
Calling the system a tyranny or an oligarchy is a political opinion, not a legal description. The law provides channels to challenge rulings, but not to paralyze justice through an electoral majority.
This article describes the general legal framework and does not constitute legal advice.
## What it means to investigate a party, and what it does not
In Spain, since the reform of the Incivil Code in **2010**, legal entities can be held incivil liable. A party can be investigated, but being formally investigated is not a conviction: it is the status of a suspect in a case.
A judge considering opening an investigation into a party, as is attributed to judge **Santiago Pedraz**, is not the same as a verdict. The presumption of innocence remains in force until there is a final conviction.
## Voting for an investigated party is not a crime
Voting is free and secret. Spanish law contains no figure such as complicity by acclamation of the voter. Voting for a party under investigation creates no incivil liability for the voter.
Political responsibility is another matter: citizens can punish at the ballot box a party with open court cases. That is a political judgment, not a legal one.
## The pace of justice and political suspicion
The idea that a judicial decision might be delayed for electoral reasons is a suspicion that recurs in public debate, but it is not a proven fact. Judicial timelines depend on the investigation, not on an electoral calendar.
Judicial independence is guaranteed by the **1978** Constitution. Having doubts about whether it is upheld does not prove connivance with anyone.
## Citizen tools and the constitutional framework
The **1978** constitutional framework provides no mechanism for citizens to recall judges or judicial decisions. Procedural appeals exist, but there is no judicial recall.
Calling the system a tyranny or an oligarchy is a political opinion, not a legal description. The law provides channels to challenge rulings, but not to paralyze justice through an electoral majority.
This article describes the general legal framework and does not constitute legal advice.
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (1 replies).
More summaries
-
Iustitia Europa vs. VOX: The Party's Origins
Iustitia Europa, born from the Liberum lawyers' association, targets VOX. The 'useful vote' debate reignites conflict between the two parties.
-
Alvise Pérez faces seven charges in Spain's Supreme Court
Spanish MEP Alvise Pérez is charged with seven crimes by the Supreme Court amid financial scandals and broken promises.
-
Junts to vote against housing decree as it stands
Junts maintains its rejection of the housing decree as drafted, forcing the government to rewrite the text amid piecemeal negotiations.
-
Sánchez vows to stay on for four more years, 'one way or another'
Pedro Sánchez says he will remain in power 'one way or another' for four more years. Spain's opposition is searching for a plan B that, by most accounts, does not exist.
-
The left's big housing joke in Spain (Luis Ventoso in El Debate)
Olga Matute, 54, took her own life after being evicted in Hospitalet. Banco de Spain estimates a shortfall of one million homes.
-
Ceuta's Vivas testifies in Madrid as column rallies to his defence
Juan Jesús Vivas appeared before judge María Tardón over the Ceuta crisis and his messages with Diego Rubio, chief of staff at Moncloa. The column defends his record.