Country

Spain Spain

Title

Giménez-Salinas, A. Pérez Manzano, M. Cancio Meliá, M. Díaz López, J.A. Jordá Sanz, C. Díaz Izquierdo, P Gallego Arribas, D., Observatorio Español del Racismo y la Xenofobia (OBERAXE) (2018), Analysis of cases and rulings IN SEXUAL, RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, XENOFOBIA AND OTHER FORMS OF INTOLERARATION 2014-2016 (Análisis de casos y sentencias EN MATERIA DE RACISMO, DISCRIMINACIÓN RACIAL, XENOFOBIA Y OTRAS FORMAS DE INTOLERANCIA 2014-2016), Madrid, Ministry of Employment and Social Security (Ministerio de Empleo y Seguridad Social).

View full Research

Year

2018

Type of publication

Study - qualitative research

Geographical coverage

National Regional Local

Area/location of interest

Not applicable - national level

Type of Institution

Public authority

Institution

Spain, Ministry of Employment, Migration and Social Security – Subdirectore General for Administrative Information and Pulications | Ministerio de Trabajo, Migraciones y Seguridad Social- Subdirección General de Información Administrativa y Publicaciones

Main Thematic Focus

Racism & xenophobia

Target Population

General population

Key findings

The study focusing on case and rulings concludes that the average delay in prosecution or time elapsed between the facts and the date of the judgment is 2 years. The aggravating circumstance of Art. 22.4 Criminal Code (CC) was applied in 14% of cases, mostly in cases of hatred based on sexual orientation, racial origin and political ideology.
Most common crimes are crimes against moral integrity (173.1CC). Imprisonment is the most common penalties, followed by special disqualification for passive suffrage and a ban on approximation and communication with the victim or injured persons. Mitigating circumstances in a 25% of cases and 5 exempt circumstances were applied. In 2.5 out of 10 cases there were previous complaints, preferably from the victim against the accused. Precautionary measures applied in 20% of the cases.

Methodology (Qualitative/Quantitative and exact type used, questionnaires etc)

quantitative (case rulings)
qualitative (expert assessments)

Sample details and representativeness

The selected sample of rulings was provided by the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) (Consejo General del Poder Judicial) requesting Center for Judicial Documentation (CENDOJ) (Centro de Documentación Judicial) for a repository of rulings. The CENDOJ Database covers judgments handed down by collegiate bodies. This means that all these bodies have an obligation to refer all judgments handed down by them, which does not preclude CENDOJ's decisions of sole-person bodies. In addition, the State Attorney General's Office made a commitment to compile and facilitate the judgments: it did include both judgments and orders. It did contribute with 41 sentences handed down in 2014 and 2015, of which 37 were handed down by single-person bodies and 4 from Provincial Hearings. The rest were compiled by CENDOJ.

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.