JOHN CARLOS I

KING OF SPAIN

To all who present it and understand,

Sabed: That the General Courts have approved and I come to sanction the following Organic Law:

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

I
CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATION

Article 125 of the Spanish Constitution of 1978 states that " citizens may participate in the Administration of Justice through the institution of the Jury, in the form and with respect to those criminal proceedings that the law determine ".

Our constitutional text fulfills what can be considered a constant in the history of Spanish constitutional law; every period of freedom has meant the consecration of the jury; thus in the Constitution of Cadiz In 1837, 1869 and 1931, and on the contrary, each time of the decline of public freedoms has eliminated or considerably restricted this instrument of citizen participation, in parallel and as a complement to the restrictions of the All of its rights and instruments for participation in public affairs.

A tool of unquestionable liberal roots is therefore retaken, and it is made from the indisputable fact that, from the first outline of 1820 until its suspension in the year of 1936, few legal institutions have suffered-and by have been enriched-with critical debugging as marked as the Jury Court, which has led to the removal of the massive mass of loose data, experiences and precedents that have facilitated the institution's full uptake.

Above pro-or anti-jurist conceptions, our Fundamental Rule links the instrument of the jury, in an unquestionable way, with two fundamental rights: the direct participation of citizens in public affairs, Article 23.1 of the Spanish Constitution, and the right to the default ordinary judge by the law of 24.2 of our fundamental text.

Indeed, we find ourselves, on the one hand, a modality of the exercise of the subjective right to participate in public affairs, belonging to the sphere of the "status activae civitatis", the exercise of which is not carried out through of representatives, but is exercised directly when the citizen is personally granted the status of a jury. Hence, the representative character of the institution should be discarded and its participatory and direct character should be recognised exclusively.

Therefore, it can be preached that the Institute that is regulated differs from other models by the peculiar way in which the right-duty of the citizen is articulated to participate directly in a real power of the State; we find ourselves before a right-of-duty, which is reflected in the legal text by adopting coercive measures to ensure compliance with the obligation and, consequently, the establishment of those other measures aimed at mitigating, as far as possible, excessive onpayment of the performance of the duty, through the remuneration of the function and the compensation of the costs incurred for exercising them. The Law is part of the conception that the democratic state is characterized by the participation of the citizen in public affairs. Among them there is no reason to except those referred to imparting justice, but instead a procedure must be established that satisfies that constitutional right as fully as possible.

It is not, in short, a question of trusting the capacity of the citizens, as if the negative alternative is tolerable in a democratic system. It is just a question of having any explanatory reasons beyond his questionable historical failure, but of his authoritarian and anti-democratic suspension.

But the institution of the Jury is at the same time and in a complementary manner, a manifestation of article 24 of the Constitution that declares that everyone has the right to the ordinary Judge predetermined by the Law; it therefore complies with a This is a function which is necessary for due process, but it does so from a different point of view than the one attributed to it in its reception in the bourgeois liberal State; there is no reluctance to the professional judge; it is not about establishing an alternative Justice in parallel and even less in contradiction to that of the Judges and the Magistrates of race referred to in the article 122 of the Constitution, but of establishing procedural rules that satisfy at the same time and in parallel all the demands of the criminal proceedings with the right-duty of the citizens to participate directly in the constitutional function of judging.

Article 125 of the Constitution definitively assumes an unequivocal constitutional position that forces the long parenthesis of limited experiences and expectations of citizen participation in public affairs, and in which The institution of the Jury reappears with a renewed load of suggestions and nuances capable of giving meaning and projection to the social reality, today sufficiently contrasted, that demands an urgent change in the ways of administering justice.

Its development is not, as a result, only a constitutional imperative, but it is an urgent necessity as a decisive part of an in-depth reform of the whole of the Administration of Justice, which is felt as a necessity for a good part of the citizens.

This reality has also been recognized by the General Council of the Judiciary. Thus, in the memoirs drawn up in the years 1991 and 1992 and in the Circumstantial Relationship of the Needs of the Administration of Justice for the year 1993, under the heading relating to the legislative amendments which it considered appropriate for the The Court of Justice has stated that the Court of Justice has not been able to take the necessary steps to ensure that the Court of Justice is in a position to take the necessary steps to ensure that the substantial modification of the institution through its incardination in the procedural system, without this suppose a delayed element of criminal justice. "

With the approval of this Law, a further qualitative step is taken, from a technical-legal perspective, aimed at closing the basic model of Justice designed by the Constitution and the Organic Law of the Judiciary, facilitating the participation of citizens in the administration of justice. The establishment of the Jury Court should be considered as one of the constitutional contents still pending development. With its regulation in this Law, a constitutional mandate has been implemented so many times and one of the basic pieces in the operation of the Administration of Justice designed by the constituent is established.

II
SWORN CITIZENS

We have already warned that this Law is part of the fact that the Jury implies a manifestation of the right of participation, and this undoubtedly determines that the questions that are truly essential to elucidate are that of the field of knowledge. of the Jury and, within this, the function that has been recognized to the participating citizens.

An elementary prudence advises graduation in the institution's process of setting up, both in selecting the number of cases, and the nature of the cases. Reasons for its proper implementation advise that all those who have to intervene in this type of process should familiarize themselves with their peculiarities so different to the current way of holding the trials. The concreteness of the object of the judgment, the arguments of the parties, the evidentiary material to attend, the language to use, the very content of the resolutions must vary substantially.

The Law takes into account the fact that the trial of Jurados constitutes the full expression of the basic principles of the right to immediate proceedings, proof formed based on the free conviction, exclusion of illegal evidence, publicity and orality. For this reason, those crimes have been selected in which the typical action lacks excessive complexity or in which the normative elements are specially suitable for their assessment by non-professionalized citizens in the function judicial.

The jurisdiction of the Court of Justice is set out in Article 1. However, the future legislator will certainly appreciate, in the light of experience and the social consolidation of the institution, the progressive extension of the crimes to be prosecuted.

The conformation of the decider college within the Jury Court requires a legislative answer whose success does not necessarily go through the old logical question about the cleavability between the fact and the right.

The authors of our old Jurado Law, linking the historical origin of the institute to the testimony of the neighbors as a formula for deciding the litigation, sponsored for the sworn citizen an intervention limited to the proclamation of the tested fact.

Such a source is debatable and, moreover, it is not always possible to decide on the veracity of a historical statement, a typical budget of the crime, without thinking of legal assessments. But, in any case, and this is the most important thing, the model now proposed in the Law reaches a legitimizing depth that is then unattended. Therefore, in the Law, the Jury is not limited to deciding whether the fact is proven or not, but it values aspects such as the normative components that give rise to the exemption or not the criminal liability.

In the Law, the option adopted regarding the selective process of juries is consistent with the consideration that their participation constitutes a right-of-duty. Citizenship, under the conditions it provides for the full exercise of civil rights, constitutes the index of presumed capacity not needed for other exclusions or accreditations of proven capacity, except those that are notoriously prevent the exercise of the function of prosecution.

The desirability of a participation as widely accepted as possible leads to the recognition of a generous excuse regime and referred to the prudence of the jurisdiction to be appreciated.

The selective system is characterized: (a) the succession of steps to ensure the presence of candidates in an appropriate number to avoid suspensions in the statements and the anticipated knowledge by those of their possible call to intervene; b) for transparency and advertising of the selective process in which not only the mechanisms for detecting the causes of exclusion are inserted, but the judicial guarantees for both the candidate and, at a later stage, the parties to the trial; from the census lists as a system, not only democratic as far as it excludes criteria elitist-not even a fuser of scientists-but consistent with the very foundation of participation.

It has been considered that, if an exclusion criterion, different from the above mentioned, is admitted in this Law, on the pretext of reaching a plus of capacity on the presumed derivative of the inclusion in the census, it would be distorting the concept of the village.

But this must not prevent a certain conciliation between the right to participate in the draw with the right of the parties to seek a certain pluralism in the jurisdiction. To some extent, the number of juries to be designated (nine) tends to be, but makes it even more possible for the parties to be able to recuse themselves without the need to claim cause on the basis of subjective assessments of the criteria for the decision of the candidate. Although this possibility should be subject to strong number limitations, the results produced in the historical experience should be avoided.

III
NECESSARY PROCEDURAL REFORMS AS A GUARANTEE OF THE VIABILITY OF THE JURY ' S OPERATION

1
In the so-called staging phase

Some have proclaimed that any procedural specialty must begin where the jury's intervention begins, that is, in the oral trial phase. It has been held that if the Jury is limited to intervening in the oral trial, the formal or mixed accusatory model of the Criminal Prosecution Act should not be modified.

Such an opinion ignores forced considerations:

(a) The current system of prosecution by technical judges is based on normative premises that are difficult to pass on to the oral trial before the Tribunal of the Jury, which could determine the failure of the prosecution by non-professionalised citizens. The necessary modifications must be inexorably projected on the preparatory phase of the oral trial.

b) Our Constitutional Court has established a body of doctrine that is not only enriching, because of the traditional defects of our procedural law, but it would be difficult to ignore it in the Law.

Alonso Martinez complained about the custom, so deeply rooted in our Judges and Courts, of giving little or no value to the plenum's trials, seeking the truth in the summarial diligence. practiced behind the defendant's back. This Law conceives that the oral trial before the Court of Jury should culminate in the eradication of this procedural malformation through the practice of the entire trial.

The consequent risk of excessive prolongation of the trial act advises the introduction of simplification mechanisms. Of these, the most essential is the precise definition of the subject matter of the procedure to be carried out in the preceding phase.

The current system of resolution on the opening of the oral trial is expressed in two different procedural modalities-in the case of ordinary or abbreviated procedure-although, in both, it is limited to a decision merely negative which is dysfunctional for prosecution by jury. Therefore, the model was to opt for one or another procedure, being difficult to explain that, transcending the intermediate phase or trial of accusation to the judgment, the procedural unit of the latter did not demand equal unity in that one.

the other hand, the merely negative nature of the decision on the opening of the oral trial is not suitable for the precise definition of the object of the judgment, a budget essential to ensure a development of the ensure the absence of confusion of the facts to prove, that it avoids the delays inherent in the lack of objective accuracy and that, with the appropriate and impartially elaborated information, it allows to dispense with the unwanted "reproduction" of the summary or previous proceedings.

Our Constitutional Court has also proclaimed the need to promote, in the middle phase of the procedure, the procedural debate in conditions that respect the contradiction and equality of charge and defense.

With such precedents the Law has deemed it appropriate:

a) Optar for a resolution on the opening of the precise and founded oral judgment. Of course, as a part of the doctrine has been warning, there can hardly be any judicial control over the opening of the oral trial without the prior formalization of the accusation. In this way prior judicial control over the reasonableness of the charge is not limited to forwarding. On the contrary, the scope of the decision attributed to the court is increased by the possibility of adopting the decision of dismissal for any of its reasons.

(b) Such control does not only decide on a generic feasibility of the oral judgment but, by specifying which facts, of the multiple possible arguments on the basis of accusation and defence, must be the object of the evidentiary activity and determinants for their judgment in the judgment.

It should be retained that the content of the previous decision is one of the most relevant conditions of the institution's success or failure.

c) In turn the content and function of such a resolution is related, in mutual exigency, to the exclusion of the order of processing, which would be demanded by the necessary system unit in respect of the incrimination.

2
In the instruction phase

The option that the Law on the System to adopt the decision that refers to oral judgment, is projected on the phase of the procedure that precedes it:

(a) By the guarantee of impartiality of the court which is particularly strengthened. Thus, the adequacy and even the success of the research must be assessed, but at the same time it is necessary to take care of opposing or opposing claims and resistance, formulated by the prosecution, the others by the defense. The likelihood of the veracity of historical claims and of the extent to which they are legally qualified will also be assessed.

The model that is adopted requires, for elemental coherence, to allow, as soon as the imputation of a given fact is determined to a specific person, the relocation of the Judge of Instruction that will then have to be resolved on the opening of the oral trial, in a strengthened position of impartiality, with the function of controlling the imputation of the crime by means of the confirmation of its likelihood and with the ability to investigate in a complementary way on the facts asserted by the parties.

What is inescapable is that an excessive trend toward general, time-unfinished research does not contribute to the failure of the feasibility of prosecution by Jury.

On the other hand, the reproach that the system that welcomes the Law will leave without a mechanism of effectiveness the principle of mandatory criminal action can be accepted. Leaving aside what there is of indiscriminate accusation about a possible attitude of inhibition of the Prosecutor's Office, such reproach forgets that in order to start this procedure it has to have preceded denunciation or complaint of someone that, if not the Fiscal Ministry, well, given the fortunate constitutional foresight of the popular action, it may be a substitute for the lack of instance of the public prosecutor. And to this end, it tends to call upon the public action that the dissenting Judge can do to the intended intermediate phase in our Law of Criminal Procedure within the ordinary procedure.

It is forgotten when the Judge-Instructor's rating is reproached in determining the fact and person to investigate, which is so much the case in the current system of the Law of Criminal Procedure, in which, in short, it will only be object and taxable person in the oral judgment as soon as determined by the accusation. The Act remains at this same point in principle as it is accepted by the existing procedural law.

b) By the requirement of judicial imputation prior to any charge, since the decision on the opening of the oral judgment requires as a budget that such a requirement has been formalized.

The Constitutional Court has already denounced how, for almost a century, the procedural system allowed, among us, the Judge Instructor to inquire without communicating what he was seeking and questioning a suspect without letting him know what and He said he was suspicious of him, without making his self-defense possible and without providing him with a lawyer. The 1978 Constitution and the reform of the Law on Criminal Procedure by Law 53/1978 forced a crucial bias. The Constitutional Court recognized the new category of imputed to anyone who is more or less founded, a punishable act.

The filing of a complaint or complaint or the existence of an ongoing procedural action resulting from the attribution of a criminal act to a given person must be the subject of an essential assessment by the Commission. the Judge to decide on the follow-up of criminal case. Such a decision shall not be arbitrarily delayed, and shall be punishable, in accordance with that doctrine, as null and void in the investigations verified without prior communication, when appropriate.

The relationship of the aforementioned doctrine with which it promotes the debate on equal terms and with which it demands that those who are going to carry out prosecution functions do not make accusations, have determined that the law will be enacted by a instruction which, from the moment the fact is justified and the person is determined and corresponds to this procedure, requires:

(a) that someone outside the court makes an imputation, precisely before initiating the investigation,

(b) that the prosecution of the latter requires an assessment by a court that is preceded by the opportunity for debate between the parties,

(c) that during the investigation that the Judge considers reasonable to follow, he maintains a differentiated position of the parties, and

d) be this Judge, thus preserved in a certain impartiality, the one who controls the origin of the opening or not of the oral judgment, in a positive and not only negative way, with precision of the object of the judgment and decision of the information necessary to refer to the Jury Tribunal, which, however, prevents the provision of the sumarial material which could limit the effective incidence of the principles of orality, inmediation and celerity necessary for such prosecution.

IV
THE ORAL TRIAL

1
Previous Issues

The concern for proper preparation of the oral trial obstinately aimed at preventing its failure, leads in the Law to intensify the role assigned to the Magistrate in that preamble of the celebration of the oral trial already opened.

The decision, adopted by the Instructor on the opening of the oral trial, can undoubtedly be the object of the discrepancy of the parties. The law similar to that of the Law on Criminal Procedure is dealt with in the law similar to that of the Law of Criminal Procedure; an appeal against the dismissal and the lack of recourse to the opening, without prejudice to the fact that in the latter case the parties to the person may raise the prior questions or exceptions referred to in Article 36 of the Act.

But the discrepancy can be raised in relation to particular aspects of the resolution referring to the object of the judgment and in this case the technique of the appeal is unnecessarily dilatory, since the same objective can be achieved by the approach of the complaint as a matter prior to the Magistrate who is to preside over the Court.

This review faculty is complemented by the Law with the direction of the debate that is translated into the formulation, adjusted to the structure of the verdict of its object.

The decision on the admission of the test, subject to its relevance, is attributed in the Law to the Magistrate who has previously already configured the object of the trial and with it the objective facts of the test, and to him also it is appropriate to assess the impossibility of postponement requiring the advance practice and, in short, to resolve any allegations of probative ilicitude.

2
Jury Court Constitution

The Tribunal of the Jury does not constitute, and this is one of its most defining notes, a permanent court, which always demanded the pointing out of the period during which the constituted was to be known. In this way, the causes to be known were determined according to two data: the time for which the Court and the Judicial Party of origin of the causes had been formed.

The first criterion has been replaced in the Law by the formation of a Jury for each cause, thus accentuating the note of temporality of the judicial body. Several reasons advise this solution. The first is that, at least, at the beginning of the institution's reinstatement, the burden of examining all the causes to be tried in a period should not be placed on a few Jurados. The second that, in the proposed form, is contributed, by a greater rotation in the performance of the function, to the achievement of one of the most beneficial effects of the Institution, namely: that the experience of the exercise of the function of judging act as a citizenship school for as many citizens as possible.

Maintaining a provision that fixes sessions has lost its necessary character today. However, it maintains with it not only the symbolic effect, remembering that transience of the judicial function in the citizen, but also a pattern of organization of signs. The drawing may be carried out in sufficient time for a given period in a single act. At the same time, nothing shall prevent, in conformity with Jurados for every cause which, the nature and circumstances of this, advise a pre-constituent drawing of the Tribunal on date to be prudently pointed out by the Magistrate-President.

No minor transcendence has the second option adopted in the Law in relation to the origin of the candidates to the jury. The vicinity has historically been one of the essential notes of the calls to judge as jurors. Hence, these must be, if not of the locality or of the judicial party, at least of the province in whose territory the event has taken place.

Prudence advises the opening of times as far as possible to allow for the anticipated communication of any cause that may imply the defect of the number of skilled juries on the day appointed for the trial. To this end, it responds in the Law with the absence of rigid preclusions and the anticipation in the formation of lists of candidates to the jury, as well as the forecast of the reiteration of draws before that day.

The Law provides for the possible recusal by the parties present at the beginning of the sessions. The basis of the accepted challenge, even without argument for the challenge, is none other than that of achieving, not already the impartiality of the calls to judge, but that such impartiality is presented as real to those who come to urge the Justice. But such an ideal, which would require the absence of limits in the recusal, must be reconciled with the demands that the Institution not be frustrated in its effective operation.

3
The debate

Even though the Law is barely limited to a referral to the common rules, it would be a mistake to forget that precisely in the direction of the debate of the oral judgment is one of the essential keys of success or failure of the Institution. If it is to fail, it may be so imputable to the lack of success of the Technical Judge in the preparation of the trial to which the Law is in place, as to the non-professional citizen who lacks the necessary aptitude for the performance of the function which that you assign to it.

The brevity of the referral in this section is allowed because before, as stated, the Law has been concerned to resolve essential aspects. On the one hand, the meticulous precision of the "thema probandi", rigid and intelligible reference that must inexorably guide what in the oral judgment can occur. That determination of the object of the judgment, precisely articulated in the way in which the test for the issue of the verdict must be examined, and in language intelligible to the non-professional citizen, is presented in the Law as preferable to the illustration experiences to the Jury through notes or relationships.

From another, the exclusion of the presence, even physical, of the summary in the oral judgment avoids undesirable confusions of the cognitive sources that are incondibles, thus contributing to guide on the scope and the purpose of the practice probative to be held in the debate.

The orality, immediacy, and publicity in the test that has to repeal the presumption of innocence leads in the Law to have an impact on one of the issues that most polemic has raised the question of the evidentiary value given to the proceedings. The text of the judgment and the text of the judgment.

One aspect that deserves special consideration is the participation of the Jury in the evidentiary activity. In the same way as our Criminal Procedure Law has opted for a compromise between the principle of contribution of part and the principle of investigation of trade, authorizing the Tribunal to contribute to the production of means of trial in the trial oral, that possibility is transferred to the Jury that it is precisely who has now the responsibility of the evidentiary assessment on the veracity of the imputation.

4
The dissolution of the Jury

The dissolution of the Jury, without a doubt, is one of the most striking innovations regarding our historical experience. The constitutional proclamation of the fundamental right to the presumption of innocence could not fail to project its influence on the projected Law. An influence that is tax in good part of the model in which that constitutional guarantee arose.

As antecedent in the comparative law, it is worth mentioning the forecast of the federal rules for the criminal procedure in the United States of America that allow to urge the dissolution of the Jury after the end of the trial of both parties, if such proof were insufficient to sustain conviction for such crime or crimes.

Without a doubt the scope and effects of the right guaranteed by Article 24.2 of our Constitution is debatable and discussed. The Law is part of two premises: a) the distinction in the content of the guarantee of an objective aspect concerning the existence of a true test and another, subjective, referring to the moment of assessment of that; and b) the distribution of functions between the Magistrate and the Jurados, attributing to the first the control of that objective dimension as a legal matter.

Such control is resolved in the Law in consideration of the lawfulness or observance of guarantees in the evidentiary production. But also in the objective assessment of the existence of incriminating elements. Not so much of the sufficiency to justify the conviction. This is also part of the content of the fundamental right, but it already requires the assessment of the means of proof that corresponds to the Jury.

In short, the criterion that separates the assessment of the existence of proof with respect to that of the sufficiency of the same, may be the prevailing in the case law of the cultural field of which the guarantee is oriented: it will not exist If, even in the interpretation of the practice more favourable to the thesis of the accusation, it would have to be rejected.

Limited the attribution of the Magistrate to such an obvious aspect is not extemporaneous at the end of the debate. It is true that before the judge has already assessed the existence of indications that justified the opening of the oral trial, so that it can fall into the error of believing that the minimum probative, licit and charge activity has already been achieved. Such a thesis would not know that until the oral judgment there is no real proof, that the assessment of its existence as such corresponds to the organ of the judgment and, the important thing, that in the judgment, during all the, it can be revealed the illegality or the absolute lack of incriminating force of the means of proof that was available.

It also advises such a measure of the historical experience that makes news of one of the most widespread reproaches regarding the operation of the Jury: the issue of surprising verdicts. Once again the Law places a high degree of trust in the judiciary as a guarantee of the proper functioning of the institution.

V
THE VERDICT

1
The object

Understood Alonso Martínez that extending the competition to the "nomen iuris" of the crime was a manifestation of the confusion between the fact and the law and, even more, it was the invasion by the Jurado of the legislator's faculties. Neither the latter seems easily compatible, nor the excision of the historical and the normative in the prosecution is easy. On the other hand, the reproach for the absence of motivation towards organizational systems of the jury that admit the issue of verdict for only citizens has been constant.

To one and another objection tries to give prudent response to the Law. On the one hand, because the fact is not considered conceivable from a reductionist naturalist perspective, but, precisely and exclusively, as legally relevant. A fact, in a specific selection of its own accidents, is proven to be proven only as legally as it constitutes a crime.

Depriving the Jury of the taking into account of this uncleavable link between the configuration of the historical data and its normative consequence is, on the one hand, useless since the debate will have warned it of the consequence of its decision on the proclaimed truth and will not be able to omit in its decision the reference of the consequences of its pretendidly only factual verdict.

But, in addition, with such a split, one of the causes of the greatest reproach to the Tribunal of the Jury in our experience would be reproduced. The difficult articulation of the issues, with the exclusion of the various aspects of legal technique, produced constant debates on the correctness of the verdicts and judgments.

It was also necessary to choose between the single response system or sequential articulation. That formula is more suited to a conception that is alien to the full validity and supremacy of the principle of legality. Where the Jury can, from the irresponsibility, substitute the generic and the priory criterion of the legislator for its conception in the concrete case, the apodictic verdict is not in need of articulation or motivation.

In our system the Jury must be inexorably attached to the mandate of the legislator. And such adequacy is only possible for control to the extent that the verdict externalizes the course of argument that motivated it.

And to this the Law tends:

a) Consigning to the Magistrate the rational articulation of the facts to proclaim as proven in a logical sequence.

b) Claiming as a criterion the necessary inequity of the question.

c) Allowing the Jury a flexibility, which, without abdicating the required answer to the question that is formulated, may introduce the clarifications or additions that would allow the verdict to be adapted to its conscience in the examination of the done. What, moreover, will be able to avoid predictable and surprising verdicts of guilt that would lead to the rigidity in the demand of answer that situate the Jury in unbearable discomforts to express their opinion. The catalogue of questions to be answered with monosyllables is thus circumvented, because the latter cannot collect the full opinion of the Jury, but the system already rejected by a qualified doctrine of conferring the burden of the drafting of the event is avoided. tested.

d) Demanding from the Jury that their proven ability to decide for one or another version reaches the degree necessary for the exposure of their motives. It is true that the exposition of what was proved by proven explicit the argument of the conclusion of guilt or guilt. But today, the constitutional demand for motivation is not satisfied with it. The motivation of these arguments is also necessary. And of course it is considered that in no way it requires special artifice and it counts in any case the Jury with the possibility to urge the necessary advice.

e) Adding to that content the pronouncement on the valuation that the fact deserves according to its legal classification. For such a pronouncement, it will not be so much the difficulty in a task of technical qualification of the fact, as in opting in the various versions of this one. Once again the prudence and good doing of the Magistrate comes to constitute a guarantee of the success of the model.

f) The conformation of the object of the verdict cannot dispense with the consideration of the object of the process as linked to the allegations of all the parties, the interests of the defense and the prosecution and, also, the right of are to participate in the final drafting in the middle of the appropriate hearing.

2
Instructions

In them is another of the conditions of the success or failure of the prosecution by Jurado. But their justification, which is no other than to fill in the deficiencies that may arise from the technical lack of knowledge of the Law, prevents them from spreading to aspects in which the Jurados must and can act with spontaneity.

It is therefore considered appropriate to delete one of its contents, one whose inclusion has been a major controversy in our past historical experience: the summary of the test practiced.

However, technical advice cannot dispense with the warning of non-compliance with those probative activities that suffer from legal defects that require them to be discarded. To the extent that the instructions have a bearing on the determination of the verdict, it seems appropriate that they should be subject to the control of the parties so that they are convinced of the impartiality of those parties and, if not, of the opportunity to combat the infringement.

the Jury's need for instruction and spontaneity are objectives that can be hindered and that make it necessary to reconcile them. Thus, even when the Jury must meet to deliberate without any media interference, it has not wanted to dispense with the permanent availability of access to the advice that, freely, they want to demand.

Special consideration deserves the possibility allowed in the Law so that, even without the mediation of the Jurados, the Magistrate can impart those instructions that tend to avoid an unnecessary prolongation of the deliberation. It is a question of preventing the inexperience of the deliberants united with their reluctance to urge the instruction, to produce an unjustified delay in the issue of the verdict that would affect the prestige of the institution.

3
Deliberation and Voting

The secret of deliberation must not prevent the indispensable responsibility of the jurors. This is why the vote is imposed nominal, which allows the identification of the abstention prohibited in the Law.

Without a doubt, the rule of decision that requires unanimity in the sense of the decision to have the verdict produced, is presented as the most appropriate one to compels the juries to a richer debate. However such a rule implies a very high risk of failure to achieve such unanimity. A proper compromise between the objectives of a deliberation indirectly oriented to the vote since its inception, by formation of simple simple majorities, and the avoidance of excessive solutions of the Jury, that may come motivated by the simple and unjustifiable obstinacy of one or few juries, has advised, at least in the beginning of the operation of the Institution, a less demanding rule of decision.

For the proper functioning of the institution, the Law rejects the possibility, historically admitted, of returning the verdict by discrepancy in its sense. But this must not prevent the presence of defects, which would give rise to its revocation by means of recourse given its opposition to the Law, to be remedied by the intervention of the Magistrate, with the presence of the parties, making present such defects and indicating what is necessary to the Jury for such remedy.

VI
STATEMENT

The relationship of the Magistrate to the verdict is reflected in the receipt of the verdict and in the absolute or damning sense of the judgment. The Magistrate, also bound by the legal title of the sentence, shall carry out the qualification necessary to determine the degree of execution, the participation of the sentenced person and the origin or otherwise of the amending circumstances of the responsibility and, consequently, to the implementation of the applicable penalty.

It is to be emphasized that the concern in the Law for the motivation of the resolution also leads to demand from the Magistrate that, regardless of the motivation that the jurors make of the appraisal of the existing test, that has of Why do I consider that there was such evidence on which I authorize the verdict. The aim of the law is to prevent the criticism of the decision on the separation of the decision-making body, both with regard to the inseparability of the event and the right, and in relation to the alleged irresponsibility for lack of responsibility. the statement of reasons for the verdict and judgment, which, it is said, should be inherent in such a system.

VII
MODIFICATIONS OF LEGAL BODIES AND PROCEDURAL SPECIALTIES

1
Antejuicio Regime

Article 410 of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judicial Branch, discipline the antejuicio as a precedent for the object of requiring criminal responsibility to Judges or Magistrates, according to the regime foreseen in the Articles 757 to 778 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the legislator has sought to replace such an appeal in the case of offences committed by Judges, Magistrates or Prosecutors, attributed to the knowledge of the Court of Justice, by a speciality which empowers the Judge of Instruction to practice the necessary verification actions and to resolve the source of the imputation.

2
Modification of the Organic Law of the Judiciary

The criteria contained in the Law substantially reflect the principles that Article 83.2 of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, referred to the future Law of the Jury, so that the complete regulation of the Law of the Institution, such foresight is unnecessary. Given that the constitutional doctrine has been demanding a unitary normative text for the development of Article 122.1 of the Constitution, the aforementioned precept of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch has been modified, as the This Law affects the powers and functions of the courts, in accordance with Article 83.2, the mandatory reference to the Organic Law of the Court of Jury.

3
The Tax Ministry at the instructional phase

While it must be up to the judge to carry out the summary acts, the peculiarities that must preside over the proceedings before the jury and the opportunity to consolidate the accusatory principle, make it necessary to strengthening of the powers of the Prosecutor's Office. In this way, the opening and its adaptation to the new procedure, as well as the constitution of the Prosecutor's Office together with the Judge Instructor and the immediate putting in knowledge of the imputation, in the terms provided for in Articles 24 and 25 of the Law, they also have their procedural framework by incorporating provisions in article 309, for the ordinary procedure, and in articles 780 and 789.3 of the Law of Criminal Procedure, for the abbreviated.

It is consistent, on the other hand, with the referral of Article 36 of the Law to Articles 668 to 677 of the Criminal Prosecution Act for the processing of incidents by the approach of previous questions, to add to the Article 678 of the same the exclusion of the possibility-in proceedings before the Jury-to reproduce in the oral judgment the dismissed questions. The same coherence is preached of the substitution of the resource against the resolutorium of the declination or the admission of the exceptions of the article 666 of the Law of Criminal Procedure, that it introduces the appeal, in congruence with the intended use against the judgments of the Provincial Court.

4
Precautionary Measures

The introduction of a new article 504 bis 2 in the Law of Criminal Procedure, regarding the adoption of precautionary measures of deprivation or restriction of freedom, incorporates a necessary hearing of the Fiscal Ministry, the (a) the parties and the assisted legal counsel, inspired by the accusatory principle, and suppresses the requirement of ratification of the order of imprisonment. In this way, the limitation of the judicial initiative is balanced with the introduction of the benefits of the contradictory, without prejudice to the reformable character of the measures adopted during the entire course of the cause.

5
Appeal and appeal

The new Book V of the Criminal Prosecution Act, called "Appeal, Appeal and Review," is aimed at extending the appeal against orders and judgments arising from the proceedings before the Court of Justice. Jury, as well as for certain resolutions of the ordinary criminal in the cases of article 676 of the procedural rule. The new appeal aims to close the right to "double examination" or "double review", while the regime sufficiently complies with the requirement that both the conviction and the penalty imposed be submitted to a higher court, depending on the of the special nature of the proceedings before the Jury, and without prejudice to the proper role to be played by the appeal.

To do so, the Law suits the grounds of challenge provided for this very special character of the procedure and attributes the resolutive competence to the Civil and Criminal Chambers of the Supreme Courts of Justice, which, apart from of the necessary adjustments in personal means, responds to an already old aspiration in the competence delimitation for the knowledge of the appeal.

CHAPTER I

General provisions

Article 1. Jurisdiction of the Jury Court.

1. The Tribunal of the Jury, as an institution for the participation of citizens in the Administration of Justice, will have jurisdiction for the prosecution of the crimes attributed to its knowledge and has failed for this or other Law regarding the contained in the following headings:

a) Crimes against human life.

b) Crimes committed by civil servants in the exercise of their positions.

c) Crimes against honor.

d) Misuse of the duty of relief.

e) Crimes against intimacy and domicile.

f) Crimes against freedom.

g) Crimes against the environment.

2. Within the scope of the procedure provided for in the previous paragraph, the Court of Jury shall be competent for the knowledge and failure of the causes for the offences defined in the following provisions of the Criminal Code:

a) Articles 405 to 410, both inclusive (homicide and infanticide).

b) Articles 362 to 366, both inclusive (infidelity in custody of prisoners and infidelity in the custody of documents).

c) Articles 385 to 396, both inclusive (co-made and misappropriation of public funds).

(d) Articles 400 to 404 (c), both inclusive (illegal fraud and charges, prohibited negotiations with officials and influence peddling).

e) Article 489 ter (omission of the duty of relief).

f) Articles 490 to 492 bis, both inclusive (trespass).

g) Article 493 (threats).

(h) Articles 553 bis (a) to 553 bis (c), both inclusive (environmental offences).

3. The trial of the jury will be held only in the field of the Provincial Court and, where appropriate, of the Courts that correspond by reason of the defendant's capacity. In any case they are excluded from the jurisdiction of the Jury, the crimes whose prosecution is attributed to the National Court.

Article 2. Composition of the Jury Tribunal.

1. The Jury is composed of nine jurors and a Magistrate of the Provincial Court, who will preside over it.

If, by reason of the defendant's capacity, the trial of the Jury must be held within the scope of the Supreme Court or a High Court of Justice, the Magistrate-President of the Court of Jury shall be the President of the Chamber or Section of the Criminal Court of the Supreme Court or the President of the High Court of Justice or the Magistrate of the Civil and Criminal Chamber in which they delegate these, respectively.

2. The jury will also be given two alternate juries, to which the provisions of Articles 6 and 7 will apply.

Article 3. Role of juries.

1. Jurors will issue a verdict declaring that the justiciable fact that the President-President has determined as such, as well as those other facts that they decide to include in its verdict and do not imply substantial variation of, are proven to be proven or not proven. that.

2. They shall also proclaim the guilt or guilt of each defendant for their involvement in the fact or criminal acts in respect of which the President-President has admitted charge.

3. Jurors in the exercise of their duties shall act in accordance with the principles of independence, responsibility and submission to the Law, referred to in Article 117 of the Constitution for members of the Judiciary.

4. Juries who in the exercise of their function are considered to be disturbed or disturbed in their independence under the terms of Article 14 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary, may be directed to the Governing Chamber of the corresponding High Court The Court of Justice shall be required to do so.

Article 4. Role of the President-President.

The Magistrate-President, in addition to other functions attributed to him by this Law, will dictate a sentence in which he will collect the jury's verdict and impose, as appropriate, the appropriate penalty and security measure.

It will also resolve, where appropriate, the civil liability of the penalty or third parties in respect of which the claim has been made.

Article 5. Determination of the jurisdiction of the Jury Court.

1. The determination of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal of the Jury shall be made on the basis of the sentence in the abstract corresponding to the alleged criminal act, whatever the participation or degree of execution attributed to the defendant. However, in the case of Article 1 (1) (a) it shall be competent only if the offence is consummated.

2. The jurisdiction of the Court of Jury shall be extended to the prosecution of the related offences, provided that the connection has its origin in any of the following cases: (a) that two or more persons simultaneously commit the various offences; (b) that two or more persons commit more than one offence in different places or times, if there has been a concert for that purpose; (c) that any of the offences have been committed to perpetrate others, to facilitate their execution or to seek their impunity.

Notwithstanding the above, and without prejudice to the provision

in Article 1 of this Law, the offence of prevarication and related offences, the prosecution of which may be carried out separately, shall not be prosecuted for connection.

3. Where a single event may constitute two or more offences, the Court of Jury shall have jurisdiction for prosecution if any of them are outside of those attributed to their knowledge.

Also, when various actions and omissions constitute a continuing offence, the Jury Tribunal shall have jurisdiction if it is attributed to its knowledge.

4. The territorial jurisdiction of the Jury Court shall be in accordance with the general rules.

CHAPTER II

Jurors

SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 6. Right and duty of jury.

The function of the jury is a right exercised by those citizens in which there is no reason to prevent it and its performance a duty for those who are not incourses because of incompatibility or prohibition, nor can they excuse themselves. in accordance with this Law.

Article 7. Remuneration and work effects and performance of the performance of the jury function.

1. The performance of the jury functions shall be remunerated and compensated in the form and amount that is determined to be determined.

2. The performance of the jury function shall have, for the purposes of the labor and civil service, the consideration of compliance with an inexcusable duty of public and personal nature.

SECTION 2 REQUIREMENTS, DISABILITIES, INCOMPATIBILITIES, BANS AND EXCUSES

Article 8. Requirements to be sworn in.

They are requirements to be sworn:

1. Being a Spanish older.

2. Find yourself in the full exercise of your political rights.

3. Know how to read and write.

4. Be a neighbor, at the time of designation, of any of the municipalities of the province in which the offence was committed.

5. Not being affected by physical or mental disability that prevents the performance of the jury function.

Article 9. Lack of ability to be sworn.

They are incapacitated to be sworn:

1. Those convicted of criminal mischief, who have not obtained rehabilitation.

2. The defendants and those charged with respect to whom the opening of the oral trial would have been agreed and those who are suffering from detention, provisional imprisonment or serving as a crime.

3. Those suspended, in criminal proceedings, in their employment or public office, for the duration of such suspension.

Article 10. Incompatibility to be sworn.

They will be incompatible for the performance of the jury function:

1. The King and the other members of the Spanish Royal Family included in the Civil Registry that regulates Royal Decree 2917/1981, of 27 November, as well as their spouses.

2. The President of the Government, the Vice-Presidents, Ministers, Secretaries of State, Deputy Secretaries, Directors-General and Assimilated Positions. The Director and Provincial Delegates of the Electoral Census Bureau. The Governor and the Deputy Governor of the Banco de España.

3. The Presidents of the Autonomous Communities, the components of the Governing Councils, Vice-Members, Directors-General and charges assimilated to them.

4. Deputies and Senators of the General Courts, Members of the European Parliament, members of the Legislative Assemblies of the Autonomous Communities and elected members of the local Corporations.

5. The President and the Magistrates of the Constitutional Court. The President and the members of the General Council of the Judiciary and the Attorney General of the State. The President and the members of the Court of Auditors and the Council of State, and the bodies and institutions of the same nature as the Autonomous Communities.

6. The Ombudsman and his deputies, as well as the similar positions of the Autonomous Communities.

7. The active members of the Judicial and Fiscal Career, the Corps of Judicial Secretaries, Medical Examiners, Officers, auxiliaries and Agents and other personnel serving the Administration of Justice, as well as the active members of the Judicial Police and the Agents of the Administration of Justice. The members of the Military Legal Corps of Defense and the Auxiliary of the Military Jurisdiction and Public Prosecutor's Office.

8. Government Delegates in the Autonomous Communities, in the Islands and in Ceuta and Melilla, as well as the Civil Governors.

9. The lawyers are active in the service of the constitutional bodies and of the public administrations or of any courts, and the lawyers and prosecutors in office. Professors and professors holding universities of legal disciplines or legal medicine.

10. Active members of the Security Forces and Corps.

11. Officials of Penitentiary Institutions.

12. The Heads of Diplomatic Mission accredited abroad, the Heads of Consular Offices and the Heads of Permanent Representations to International Organizations.

Article 11. Prohibition to be sworn.

No one can be a jury of the Tribunal that knows of a cause in which:

1. Be a private or private accuser, civil actor, defendant or third party responsible.

2. Maintain with whom any of the relations referred to in Article 219, in paragraphs 1 to 8, of the Organic Law of the Judiciary that determine the duty of abstention of the Judges and Magistrates is a part.

3. Have with the Magistrate-President of the Court, a member of the Fiscal Ministry or the Judicial Secretary who intervenes in the cause or with the lawyers or prosecutors the relationship of relationship referred to in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 11 of the Article 219 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary.

4. Have intervened in the cause as a witness, expert, guarantor or interpreter.

5. Have interest, direct or indirect, in the cause.

Article 12. Excuse to act as a jury.

Can be excused to act as a jury:

1. Those over sixty-five years old.

2. Those who have effectively performed jury functions within the four years preceding the day of the new designation.

3. Those who suffer severe disorder due to family burdens.

4. Those who perform work of relevant general interest, whose replacement would be significant damage to it.

5. Those who have their residence abroad.

6. Professional military personnel on active duty when service reasons are present.

7. Those who allege and sufficiently credit any other cause that seriously hinders the performance of the jury function.

SECTION 3. APPOINTMENT OF JURORS

Article 13. Lists of candidates for juries.

1. The Provincial Delegations of the Electoral Census Bureau shall draw up a drawing for each province, within the last fifteen days of the month of September, in order to establish the biennial list of candidates for juries.

To that effect, the Presidents of the Provincial Hearings, with a minimum of three days ' notice to the date provided for the drawing, shall determine and communicate to the Delegate of that Office the number of candidates for the They consider it necessary to obtain by lot within the province. This number will be calculated by multiplying by 50 the number of causes foreseen to be known by the Tribunal of the Jury, in an estimate made on the basis of the trials in previous years in the respective province, plus its possible increase.

2. The candidates for jury to obtain by lot will be extracted from the list of the electoral census in force at the date of the draw, ordered by municipalities, related, within these, alphabetically and numbered correlative within the set of the province. That list shall be submitted for an early exposure for seven days to the respective Councils.

The draw, which will be held in a public session previously announced in a local enabled by the corresponding Provincial Audience, will be developed in the form that will be determined.

3. Within seven days of the drawing, any citizen may, before the Provincial Court, make a complaint against the act of drawing.

The Hearing, constituted by the President and the oldest and most modern Magistrate of the Tribunal, and acting as Registrar, the Tribunal or, where appropriate, that of the First Section, shall obtain a report of the Provincial delegate of the Electoral Census Bureau and practice the necessary measures.

Before the 15th of October, it will resolve by reasoned resolution not susceptible of appeal, communicating the decision to the Provincial Delegation of the Electoral Census Bureau so that, if this is resolved, it will reiterate the draw.

4. The Provincial Delegation of the Electoral Census Bureau will send the list of the candidates to the respective Provincial Court, who will forward it to the City Councils and the "Official Gazette" of the province concerned, for their due The European Council of the European Union is a member of the European Parliament. Likewise, within that period, the Secretary of the Provincial Court will proceed, by means of a letter sent by mail, to notify each candidate to the jury of their inclusion in the list, while giving the appropriate time to the relevant person. documentation indicating the causes of incapacity, incompatibility and excuse, and the procedure for their claim.

Article 14. Claims against inclusion in the lists.

1. During the first 15 days of November, the candidates for juries, if they understand that the lack of requirements laid down in Article 8, or a cause of incapacity, incompatibility or excuse, may make a complaint. before the Dean of the Court of First Instance and the Instruction of the judicial party to which the Municipality of its vicinity corresponds for the purposes of its exclusion from the list.

You may also make such a claim any citizen who understands that any of the candidates for juries lack the requirements, capacity or incurs of incompatibility as referred to in Articles 8, 9 and 10 of this Law.

2. At the end of the period of the exhibition, the Secretaries of the Councils will refer to the Judge Dean of those of the judicial party of persons who, included in the list of candidates for juries, could, on that date, be committed to the lack of requirements or cause of incapacity or incompatibility referred to in Articles 8, 9 and 10 of this Act.

Article 15. Resolution of complaints.

Judge Dean will transfer the complaint or warning, if any, to the non-claimant, for three days. He shall carry out the information which he proposes and which he considers essential and shall give a reasoned decision on each of the complaints or warnings made before the 30th of the same month in November.

If any, please send the appropriate corrections or exclusions, communicating your resolution to the Provincial Delegation of the Electoral Census Bureau and notifying the person concerned. There is no recourse to such a resolution.

Article 16. Communication and rectification of the final lists.

1. Finalization of the final list by each province, the Provincial Delegation of the Electoral Census Bureau will send it to the President of the respective Provincial Hearing, who will send a copy to the President of the Superior Court of Justice and the President of the Criminal Court of the Supreme Court. It will also send a copy to the municipalities of the respective province for their exposure during the two years of validity of the aforementioned list.

2. Those included in the list of candidates for juries may be called upon to be part of the Jury Court for two years after the next one of January. To this end, they shall have the obligation to communicate to the Provincial Court any change of domicile or circumstance that influences the requirements, in their capacity or determines incompatibility to intervene as a jury.

3. Also, any citizen may inform the Provincial Court of the causes of incapacity or incompatibility in which, during the said period, the candidate may be sworn in. The Mayor of the respective City Council must also communicate that incident, if it were to be recorded.

4. The Provincial Court, with the composition provided for in Article 13 (3), shall carry out the information it deems appropriate and, after hearing the non-claimant, if necessary, give a reasoned decision, without (a) a decision on appeal, notifying the person concerned and making, where appropriate, the appropriate exclusion from the list of candidates for juries.

Article 17. Causes and session spans.

The Provincial Hearings, and, where appropriate, the Civil and Criminal Court of the High Courts of Justice and the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, shall, before the 40th day before the session, be held a statement of the reasons for the oral proceedings, in which jurors are to be heard.

To this effect, the sessions will be: 1) from January 1 to March 20; 2) from March 21 to June 10; 3) from June 11 to September 30, and 4) from October 1 to December 31.

Article 18. Jury draws for each cause.

In advance of at least thirty days a day appointed for the first hearing of oral judgment, having summoned the Prosecutor's Office and representatives of the parties, the Magistrate who, in accordance with the rules of distribution, shall preside The Tribunal of the Jury, shall have the Registrar, in public hearing, to make the drawing, from among the candidates to jurors of the list of the province concerned, of 36 juries for each cause indicated in the following session. The draw shall not be suspended for the inattendance of any of those representations.

Article 19. Citation of appointed jurors.

1. The Registrar of the Court shall order the necessary for the notification to the jurors of his appointment and for the summons to appear on the day indicated for the hearing of the oral judgment in the place where it is to be held.

2. The subpoena card shall contain a questionnaire, specifying the possible faults of requirements, causes of incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition which the juries are obliged to manifest as well as the alleged excuse that those may be alleged.

3. The cedula shall be accompanied by the necessary information for the appointees about the constitutional function that they are called to comply with, the rights and duties inherent in this function and the remuneration to which they are entitled.

4. The questionnaire shall be returned by mail with official postage within five working days of receipt.

Article 20. Excuse or warning of incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition.

Within five days after receipt of the notification, the designated persons may submit an excuse or notice of the lack of requirements, cause of incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition in them concurrent, the Magistrate to be presiding over the Jury Tribunal, accompanying the documentary justification that they deem appropriate.

Article 21. Recusal.

The Fiscal Ministry and the parties, to whom the questionnaire referred to in the previous article has been submitted in advance, within five days of being notified of the result of the draw, may formulate recusal of any of the causes of incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition provided for in this Law. They will also propose proof that they attempt to avail themselves.

Any cause of recusal from which knowledge is known at that time, which is not formulated, may not be further alleged.

Article 22. Resolution of excuses, warnings and recusal.

The Magistrate-President will point out the day for the hearing of the excuse, warning or recusal filed, citing the parties and those who have expressed warning or excuse. On the act the proposed measures will resolve within a third day.

Article 23. New drawing to complete the list of juries.

1. If, as a result of the above decision, the list of juries of the cause is reduced to less than twenty, the President-President shall have the right of the Registrar to proceed to the immediate drawing, in the same way as the initial, of the juries necessary to complete such a number, among those of the biennial list of the province concerned, upon convocation of the parties, quoting those appointed for the day of the oral trial.

2. The jurors thus appointed shall also be subject to the provisions of Articles 19 to 22 of this Law.

CHAPTER III

The procedure for the causes before the Jury Court

SECTION 1 OPENING AND SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTION

Article 24. Opening of proceedings before the Jury Court.

1. Where the terms of the complaint or the circumstantial relationship of the event in the complaint, and as soon as any procedural action, results against a person or persons determined the imputation of a crime, the prosecution of which is attributed to the Court of Jury, after confirmation of its likelihood, the Judge of Instruction shall proceed to order the opening of proceedings for the trial before the Tribunal of the Jury, which shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of (a) this Law, in any event, has been carried out without delay.

2. The application of the Criminal Procedure Law shall be an additional application in so far as it does not object to the provisions of this Law.

Article 25. Shipment of imputation.

1. The Judge of Instruction will immediately bring him to the attention of the defendants. To this end, it shall convene within five days of an appearance as well as the Prosecutor's Office and other parties. At the time of the summons, it shall transfer to the defendants of the complaint or complaint admitted to the proceedings, if it had not been carried out before. The person concerned shall be assisted by a lawyer of his choice or, if not appointed, a lawyer.

2. If they are known to be offended or harmed by the offence not personated, they will be summoned to be heard in the appearance provided for in the previous paragraph and, at the time of the summons, they will be instructed by means of writing, of the rights to refer to Articles 109 and 110 of the Criminal Procedure Act, if such diligence was not carried out in advance. In particular, they shall be given the right to make representations and to request what they deem appropriate if they are legal form in that act and to request, under the conditions laid down in Article 119 of that Law, the right of assistance free legal.

3. In the aforementioned appearance, the Judge of Instruction will begin by hearing the Prosecutor's Office and, in turn, the accusers personated, who will concretize the imputation. He shall then hear the lawyer of the defendant, who shall state what he deems appropriate in his defence and may call for the dismissal, if any, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 637 or 641 of the Criminal Procedure Act. In their interventions, the parties may request the investigative measures they deem appropriate.

Article 26. Decision on the continuation of the procedure.

1. Hearing the parties and the Prosecutor's Office, the Judge of Instruction shall decide on the continuation of the procedure, or the dismissal if there is cause for it, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 637 or 641 of the Law on Criminal Procedure and on the the source of the proceedings. In addition, it may order, in addition to those requested by the Prosecutor's Office and other parties, the measures which it considers necessary limited to the verification of the fact that the facts are justified and of the persons subject to imputation by the parties. accusers.

2. If the Prosecutor's Office and other parties are to urge the dismissal, the Judge may adopt the resolutions referred to in Articles 642 and 644 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The order for the withdrawal will be appealed to the Provincial Court.

Article 27. Inquiry proceedings.

1. If the Prosecutor's Office or any of the parties requests the practice of investigative proceedings, the Judge shall order them to practise, or shall practice, only if they consider them essential in order to resolve the origin of the opening of the oral judgment and cannot be practiced directly at the preliminary hearing provided for in this Law.

2. The tax ministry and the parties may also request further action within three days of the date of the appearance or the date of the last of the orders. This circumstance shall be notified to the parties in order to enable them to urge what is appropriate to them.

3. If the Judge considers that the application is not made and does not order any of its own motion, he shall transfer the new transfer to the Prosecutor's Office and to the parties in order to request, within a period of five days, what they deem appropriate in respect of the opening of the trial. Oral, written of provisional conclusions. The same shall be sent by the Judge when he considers the practice of more diligence unnecessary, even if he has not completed the practice of the already ordered.

4. If neither party nor the Prosecutor's Office requests, within that term, the opening of the oral judgment, the Judge shall order the dismissal corresponding to Articles 637 or 641 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Article 28. Imputation of a different offense.

If the Judge considers that the proceedings in question are rational indicia of a crime other than that which is the subject of proceedings or the participation of persons other than the initially charged, the latter shall act in the form established in Article 25 of this Law or, where applicable, the proceedings shall be initiated if the offence is not of those attributed to the Court of Jury.

Article 29. Written application for oral judgment and qualification.

1. The writing requesting the opening of the oral trial will have the content referred to in Article 650 of the Criminal Prosecution Act.

2. It shall be transferred to the representation of the defendant, who shall make written in the terms of Article 652 of the Law on Criminal Procedure. 3. In both cases, the alternatives provided for in Article 653 of the Criminal Procedure Act may be used.

4. In their respective writings, the parties may propose additional measures for their practice at the preliminary hearing, without it being possible to repeat those which have already been previously practiced.

5. The parties, when they understand that all the facts to be charged are not those of which they are assigned their prosecution to the Court of the Jury, shall, in their respective written application for oral judgment, request the appropriate adequacy of procedure.

If they consider that the lack of competition occurs only in respect of any of the offences which are the subject of the charge, the application will be limited to the corresponding deduction of sufficient evidence, in respect of which it is to be excluded from the the procedure followed before the Court of Justice, and the referral to the court competent for the follow-up of the due cause.

SECTION 2 PRELIMINARY HEARING

Article 30. Call for preliminary hearing.

1. Immediately after the Prosecutor's Office or an accusing party insta in the terms of the previous article the opening of the oral trial, the Judge will point out the nearest possible day for preliminary hearing of the parties on the origin of the the opening of the oral proceedings, unless the investigations requested by the defence of the defendant and declared relevant by the Judge are pending. Once these have been carried out, the Judge will proceed with the aforementioned statement. At the same time it shall decide on the admission and practice of the parties concerned to the act of such preliminary hearing.

If the Judge does not agree to the call for the preliminary hearing, the parties may complain to the Provincial Court.

2. The preliminary hearing may be waived by the defense of the accused, with the opening of the oral trial, in which case, the Judge shall decree, without further, in the terms of Article 33 of this Law. In order for such a waiver to take effect, it must be requested by the defense of all the defendants.

Article 31. Celebration of the preliminary hearing.

1. The preliminary hearing will be held on the day and hour, beginning with the practice of the measures proposed by the parties.

2. The parties may at this time propose steps to be taken in the event. The Judge shall refuse any proposed diligence that is not essential for the proper decision on the origin of the opening of the oral trial.

3. After the proceedings have been completed, the parties shall be heard about the origin of the opening of the oral proceedings and, where appropriate, the jurisdiction of the Court of Jury for prosecution. The charges may change the terms of your request for the opening of an oral trial, without it being admissible to introduce new elements that alter the fact that is justified or the accused person.

Article 32. Self-effacing or opening of oral judgment.

1. After the preliminary hearing, in the same act or within the next three days, the Judge will decide to order the opening or not of the oral judgment. If he decides not to open the oral trial he will agree to the dismissal. It may also decree the opening of the oral judgment and the partial dismissal in the terms of article 640 of the Law of Criminal Procedure if one of the defendants is present as provided for in article 637.3. of the Law of Procedure Criminal.

2. The resolution that agrees to the dismissal is appealing to the Provincial Court. The one that agrees to the opening of the oral judgment is not actionable, without prejudice to the provisions of article 36 of this Law.

3. The Judge may also order the practice of any additional diligence, before resolving, if it is deemed to be essential as a result of the proceedings at the preliminary hearing.

4. Where appropriate, the Judge may order the accommodation to the appropriate procedure, where the regulation in this Law is not applicable. If you consider that the one that corresponds to is the regulated in Title III, Book IV of the Law of Criminal Procedure, you will agree to the opening of the oral trial, if you consider it, and will refer the cause to the Provincial Hearing or Judge of the Criminal competent to pursue the knowledge of the cause in the terms of Articles 792 and following of that Act.

Article 33. Content of the opening of the oral trial.

The self that decrees the opening of the oral judgment will determine:

(a) The fact or facts that are justified by those who have been the subject of an indictment and in respect of which they deem the prosecution to be appropriate.

b) The person or persons who may be judged as defendants or third parties civilly.

c) The substantiation of the origin of the opening of the trial.

d) The body competent for prosecution.

Article 34. Testimonials.

1. In the same resolution, the Judge will order to deduce testimony from:

a) The parts ' qualification writings.

(b) The documentation of the non-reproducible proceedings and which must be ratified in the oral proceedings.

c) The opening of the oral trial.

2. The testimony, effects and instrumentalities of the offence and other pieces of conviction shall be immediately referred to the Court responsible for prosecution.

3. The parties may request, at any time, the testimonies of interest to them for further use in the oral trial.

Article 35. Placement of the parties and designation of the President-President.

1. The Judge shall order the parties to be personified within a period of 15 days before the Court responsible for prosecution.

2. The proceedings at the Provincial Court shall be received, the Magistrate shall be appointed as the appropriate time.

SECTION 3. PRIOR TO THE TRIAL BEFORE THE JURY TRIBUNAL

Article 36. Approach to previous issues.

1. At the time of personage the parties may:

a) Planting any of the issues or exceptions provided for in article 666 of the Criminal Procedure Act or to allege what they deem appropriate about the jurisdiction or inadequacy of the procedure.

b) To blind the violation of any fundamental right.

c) Interest in the extension of the trial to some fact in respect of which the opening of the Judge of Instruction would have been inadmissible.

d) Order the exclusion of any facts on which the oral judgment would have been opened, if it is reported that it was not included in the indictment.

e) Challenge the means of testing proposed by the other parties and propose new means of testing.

In this case, it will be transferred to the other parties so that within three days they can urge in writing their inadmission.

2. If any of these incidents arise, the procedure laid down in Articles 668 to 677 of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be given.

Article 37. Self-order facts, proof of origin and day-pointing for the hearing of the oral judgment.

Persons and resolved, where appropriate, the proposed questions, if this does not prevent the oral judgment, the Magistrate who is to preside at the Tribunal of the Jury will dictate order whose content will conform to the following rules:

a) Precise, in separate paragraphs, the fact or facts justiciable. In each paragraph, you cannot include terms that are likely to be tested by one another and by no other. It shall also exclude any mention which is not absolutely essential for qualification.

This relationship will include both the facts alleged by the accusations and the defense. But, if one's claim assumes the other's negation, only one proposition will be included.

(b) The facts which shape the degree of execution of the offence and the defendant's participation as well as the possible estimation of the exemption, aggravation or mitigation of criminal liability.

c) It will also resolve the provenance of the test media proposed by the parties and on the anticipation of their practice.

Against the resolution declaring the provenance of any means of proof, no recourse shall be permitted. If the practice of any means of proof is refused, the parties may formulate their opposition for the purposes of further appeal.

d) You will also point out day for the hearing of the oral judgment by adopting the measures referred to in Articles 660 to 664 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

SECTION 4. CONSTITUTION OF THE JURY TRIBUNAL

Article 38. Concurrence of the members of the Jury Tribunal and recusal of jurors.

1. The day and time indicated for the trial shall be the Magistrate who shall preside at the Tribunal of the Jury with the assistance of the Registrar and the presence of the parties. If at least twenty of the invited jurors are present, the President-President will open the session. If that number is not present, the form indicated in the following Article shall be carried out.

2. The President-President shall again question the jurors in case of any cause of incapacity, incompatibility, prohibition or excuse provided for in this Law. The parties may also by themselves or through the Magistrate-President question the jurors in respect of the matters referred to in the preceding paragraph.

3. The parties may also challenge those in whom they claim grounds for incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition.

The challenges will be heard and resolved in the act itself by the President-President, in the presence of the parties and the candidate to the affected jury.

4. The President-President shall decide on the challenge, without recourse, but shall protest against the effects of the appeal which may be brought against the judgment.

Article 39. How to complete the minimum number of juries and possible penalties.

1. If, as a result of the failure to appear on the part of some of the members of the jury, or of the exclusions resulting from the provisions of the preceding Article, no more than 20 juries have been made, a new statement shall be made within the 15 days thereafter. They shall be cited for the purpose of the comparients and the absent and at a number not exceeding eight which shall be designated by draw in the act of the two-yearly list. If the parties allege at that time any cause of incapacity, incompatibility or prohibition of the so designated as was accepted by the Magistrate-President without protest from the other non-recusal parties, it shall be completed with a new drawing to obtain the figure of the eight complementary ones.

2. The Magistrate-President will impose the fine of 25,000 pesetas on the jury convened that he would not have appeared to the first summons or justified his absence. If you do not appear on the second citation, the fine will be 100,000 to 250,000 pesetas.

At the time of the second summons, the President-President will warn them of the sanction that may be of them if they do not appear.

The determination of the amount of the second fine will take into account the economic situation of the jury that has not appeared.

3. If, on the second call, the minimum number of concurrent juries is not obtained, the same shall be done in the same way as in the first successive calls and supplementary draws, until the necessary concurrency is obtained.

4. In any event, the necessary measures shall be taken in respect of the proposed means of proof to enable their practice once the Jury Court has been established.

Article 40. Jury selection and constitution of the Court.

1. If the sufficient number of juries is present, a successive drawing shall be drawn up to select the nine who shall be part of the Court, and two more as alternates.

2. The names of the jurors in an urn will be extracted, one by one, by the Secretary who will read his name in a loud voice.

3. The parties, after formulating the relevant questions and the President-in-office, after formulating the relevant questions, may refuse to give a specific plea of up to three of those on the part of the charges and three others of the defenses.

If there are several accusers and defendants, they must act by mutual agreement to indicate the jurors who recuse without argument of cause. If no agreement is reached, the order in which the accused or accused parties may formulate the recusal shall be decided by lot until the quota of recusables is exhausted.

The civil actor and the third-party civil servants cannot make unchallenged recusal.

4. The following shall be followed in the same way for the appointment of the alternates. When only two are subtracted to be designated alternate, no recusal will be admitted without cause.

5. The draw, of which the Registrar will extend the minutes, shall be established the Court.

Article 41. Oath or promise of the appointees.

1. Once the Tribunal has been constituted, the appointees will be sworn in or promised. Standing the Magistrate-president will say: " Do you swear or promise to perform well and faithfully your jury function, to examine with righteousness the accusation made against-here shall indicate the name and surname of each defendant-, appreciating without hatred or affected the evidence to be given to you, and to resolve with impartiality whether or not they are guilty of the crimes charged, as well as to keep the secret of the deliberations? ".

2. Jurors will be approaching, one in one, the presence of the Magistrate-president and, placed in front of him, they will say: "if I swear" or "if I promise," and take seat in the place intended for effect.

3. The President-President, when all have sworn or promised, will say: "If you do so, your fellow citizens will reward you; and, if not, you will be sued" and the public hearing will begin.

4. No one shall be able to perform the duties of a jury without taking the oath or promise indicated. Whoever refuses to lend it will be undermined by the payment of a fine of 50,000 pesetas that the President-President will impose on the act. If the call persists in its refusal, the right to blame will be deducted, and instead it will be called the alternate.

SECTION 5. ORAL JUDGMENT

Article 42. Enforcement of the Criminal Prosecution Act.

1. Upon oath or promise, commencement of the oral trial shall be initiated in accordance with the provisions of Articles 680 and following of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. The accused or accused shall be located in such a way that their immediate communication with the defenders is possible.

Article 43. Celebration behind closed doors.

For the decision to hold a closed door, the President-President, hearing the parties, shall decide what he considers relevant, after consulting the Jury.

Article 44. Assistance of the defendant and the defence lawyer.

The holding of the oral trial requires the assistance of the defendant and the defense attorney. The latter shall be at the disposal of the Tribunal of the Jury until the verdict is rendered, with the oral judgment before the Court of Justice of the Court of Justice of the Court of Justice of the Court of Justice of the Court of Justice. place.

However, if there are several defendants and one of them is no longer in attendance, the President-in-Office may agree, hearing the parties, the continuation of the trial for the others.

The unjustified absence of the third civil responsible cited in due form shall not in itself cause a suspension of the trial or its prosecution.

Article 45. Previous allegations of the parties to the Jury.

The judgment will begin by reading by the Secretary of the Qualification Writings. Then the President-President shall open a duty of intervention of the parties to give the Jury the arguments they deem appropriate in order to explain the content of their respective qualifications and the purpose of the test which they have proposed. On that occasion, they may propose to the President-President new evidence to practice at the event, resolving the act after hearing the other parties who wish to oppose their admission.

Article 46. Test specialties.

1. Jurors, through the President-in-Office and upon a declaration of relevance, may direct, in writing, witnesses, experts and defendants the questions they consider to be conducive to establishing and clarifying the facts on which the evidence is to be found.

2. Jurors will see for themselves the books, documents, papers, and other pieces of conviction referred to in Article 726 of the Criminal Prosecution Act.

3. For the eye inspection test, the Tribunal shall be constituted in its integrity, with the jurors, at the place of the event.

4. The proceedings referred by the Judge Instructor may be displayed to the jurors in the practice of the test.

5. The Prosecutor's Office, the lawyers of the prosecution and those of the defense will be able to question the accused, witnesses and experts about the contradictions that they consider to exist between what they manifest in the oral trial and what is said in the instructional phase. However, such statements may not be read in advance, although the record of the testimony to be presented in the act shall be joined to the record.

Statements made at the instruction stage, except those resulting from advance testing, shall have no probative value of the facts in which they are asserted.

Article 47. Suspension of the procedure.

When, in accordance with the Law of Criminal Procedure, the holding of the oral trial is suspended, the President-President may decide to dissolve the Jury, which shall, in any event, always agree that the suspension may be suspended. to extend for five or more days.

Article 48. Amendment of the provisional findings and final conclusions.

1. With the conclusion of the test, the parties may amend their provisional findings.

2. The President-President shall require the parties to the terms provided for in Article 793 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, where appropriate, to the provisions of paragraph 7 of that provision.

3. Even if, in its final conclusions, the parties described the facts as constituting a crime for those not attributed to the prosecution of the Jury, it will continue to be known.

Article 49. Early dissolution of the Jury.

Once the reports of the indictment have been completed, the defense can request from the Magistrate-President, or this decision of its own motion, the dissolution of the Jury if it considers that the trial does not result the existence of proof of charge that it can found a conviction of the defendant.

If the non-existence of proof of charge only affects some facts or defendants, the President-President may decide that there is no place to render a verdict in relation to them.

In such cases, it will be handed down, within a third day, a reasoned absolute judgment.

Article 50. Dissolution of the Jury by conformity of the parties.

1. The jury shall also be wound up if the parties concerned are concerned that the judgment in accordance with the statement of qualification, which requests the most serious penalty, or with which it is to be presented in the act, signed by all, without inclusion of other facts than the object of judgment, nor a more serious rating than that included in the provisional findings. The sentence shall not exceed six years of deprivation of liberty, alone or in conjunction with those of fine and deprivation of rights.

2. The President-President will dictate the sentence that corresponds, taken care of the facts admitted by the parties, but, if he understood that there are quite a few reasons to estimate that the fact Justiciable has not been perpetrated or that it was not for the defendant, not The jury will dissolve and send the trial.

3. Also, if the President-President understood that the facts accepted by the parties may not be a constitutive of crime, or that the concurrence of a cause of exemption or of mandatory attenuation may result, he will not dissolve the Jury, and, after hearing of the parties, shall submit to the party in writing the object of the verdict.

Article 51. Dissolution of the Jury by withdrawal in the petition for conviction.

When the Fiscal Ministry and other accusing parties, in their final conclusions, or at any time prior to the trial, demonstrate that they are disinterested in the defendant's request for conviction, the President-President will dissolve the Jury and will dictate absolute judgment.

CHAPTER IV

The verdict

SECTION 1. DETERMINATION OF THE OBJECT OF THE VERDICT

Article 52. Object of the verdict.

1. After the oral trial is concluded, after the reports and ears of the accused, the Magistrate-president will proceed to submit to the Jury in writing the object of the verdict according to the following rules:

(a) Narrates in separate and numbered paragraphs the facts alleged by the parties and that the Jury must declare or not, differentiating between those that are contrary to the defendant and those that are favorable. It shall not include in the same paragraph favourable and unfavourable facts or facts of which some may have been tested and others are not.

He will begin by exposing those that constitute the main act of the indictment and then narrate the alleged defense. But if the simultaneous consideration of those and these as tested is not possible without contradiction, it will only include a proposition.

When the proven declaration of a fact is inferred from the same declaration of another, it will have to be proposed with due priority and separation.

(b) You will then expose, following the same separation and paragraph numbering criteria, the alleged facts that may determine the estimation of a cause of disclaimer.

(c) The following shall include, in successive, numbered and separate paragraphs, the narrative of the event determining the degree of execution, participation and modification of the responsibility.

d) Finally specify the criminal act by which the accused must be found guilty or not guilty.

e) If you have tried various crimes, you will do the previous wording separately and successively for each offense.

f) The same will do if you force multiple defendants.

g) The President-in-Office, in the light of the outcome of the test, may add facts or legal qualifications favourable to the defendant provided that they do not involve a substantial variation of the fact that is justified.

If the Magistrate-president understood that from the test derives a fact that implies such substantial variation, he will order to deduce the corresponding one so much of guilt.

2. In addition, the President-President shall, where appropriate, submit to the Jury the application of the benefits of conditional remission of the sentence and the petition or not of pardon.

Article 53. Hearing the parties.

1. Before giving the jury the written judgment, the President-President shall hear the parties, who may request the inclusions or exclusions that they deem relevant, deciding that of the appropriate plan.

2. The parties whose petitions were rejected may make representations to the effects of the appeal against the judgment.

3. The Registrar of the Jury shall incorporate the document with the object of the verdict to the minutes of the trial, giving copies of it to the parties and to each of the juries, and shall state in that court the petitions of the parties which are denied.

Article 54. Instructions to the jurors.

1. Immediately, the Magistrate-president in public hearing, with the assistance of the Secretary, and in the presence of the parties, will proceed to make them surrender to the juries of the document with the object of the verdict. At the same time, it will instruct them on the content of the function they have conferred, rules governing their deliberation and voting and how they should reflect their verdict.

2. They shall also give them a detailed account, in such a way as to be able to understand, of the nature of the facts on which the discussion has taken place, by determining the circumstances of the offence charged to the accused persons and those relating to alleged offences. exemption or modification of liability. All of this with reference to the facts and crimes listed in the letter that are given to them.

3. He will take care of the President-in-office of not making any reference to his opinion on the evidentiary outcome, but on the need for them not to attend to those means of proof whose ilicitude or nullity would have been declared by him. It shall also inform that, if after deliberation it has not been possible for them to resolve the doubts they have about the test, they shall decide in the most favourable sense to the defendant.

SECTION 2. TH DELIBERATION AND VERDICT

Article 55. Jury deliberation.

1. The Jury will then be removed to the room for deliberation.

2. Initially presided over by the one whose name was the first to leave in the draw, they will proceed to elect the spokesman.

3. The deliberation will be secret, without any of the jurors being able to reveal what it has manifested.

Article 56. Incommunicado del Jurado.

1. The deliberation will take place behind closed doors, without being allowed to communicate with any person until they have issued the verdict, taking the necessary measures to the effect.

2. If the deliberation lasted for as long as the rest was necessary, the Magistrate-President, on its own or at the request of the Jury, shall authorize it, while maintaining the incommunicado.

Article 57. Extension of instructions.

1. If any of the juries have any doubt as to any aspect of the subject matter of the verdict, they may ask, in writing and through the Registrar, the presence of the President-President to extend the instructions. The hearing shall be held in public hearing, assisted by the Registrar and in the presence of the Prosecutor's Office and other parties.

2. After two days from the beginning of the deliberation without the jurors making the minutes of the vote, the President-in-Office may summon them to the appearance provided for in the previous paragraph. If in such appearance none of the juries express doubt on any aspect of the subject matter of the verdict, the Magistrate-President shall issue the instructions provided for in Article 64 (1) of this Law with effect attributed in the same to the return of the minutes.

Article 58. Roll call vote.

1. The vote will be nominal, in high voice and in alphabetical order, voting the spokesman last.

2. None of the juries will be able to abstain from voting. If anyone insists on abstaining, after required by the spokesman, it will be recorded in the minutes and, in due course, will be sanctioned by the President-President with 75,000 pesetas of fine. If, in the case of constancy and repeated requirements, the refusal to vote persist, a new record shall be left on the record of which the corresponding testimony for the levy of the derivative criminal liability is deducted.

3. In any case, abstention shall be understood as voting in favour of not considering the fact that the defendant has been proven to be harmful to the defendant.

Article 59. Vote on the facts.

1. The spokesman will put to the vote each of the paragraphs in which the facts are described, as proposed by the Magistrate-President. Jurors will vote whether or not they estimate those facts. To be declared such, seven votes are required, at least, when they are contrary to the defendant, and five votes, when they are favorable.

2. If the majority is not obtained, the corresponding fact may be put to the vote with the details deemed relevant by the person who proposes the alternative and, once again worded the paragraph, shall be put to the vote until the indicated majority.

The modification will not mean that the part of the fact proposed by the President-President will be put to the vote. But a new, or not proposed, paragraph may be included, provided that it does not entail a substantial alteration or determine an aggravation of the liability charged by the prosecution.

Article 60. Vote on guilt or guilt, conditional remission of sentence and petition for pardon.

1. If the majority required in the vote on the facts has been obtained, the guilt or guilt of each defendant shall be put to the vote for each offence imputed.

2. Seven votes will be needed to establish guilt and five votes to establish guilt.

3. The Jury's judgment on the application to the convicted of the benefits of conditional remission of the penalty, as well as the petition for pardon in the sentence, will require the favorable vote of five juries.

Article 61. Minutes of the vote.

1. After the vote, a record shall be drawn up with the following

:

a) A first paragraph, initiated as follows: "Jurors have deliberated on the facts submitted to their resolution and have found proven, and so declare by (unanimity or majority), the following ...".

If the text proposed by the President-President is voted on, they may be limited to indicating their number.

If the voted text includes any modifications, they will write the text as voted.

b) A second paragraph, initiated as follows: "They have also found not proven, and so declare by (unanimity or majority), the facts described in the following numbers of the writing submitted to our decision." You will then indicate the numbers of the paragraphs in that document, and may reproduce your text.

c) A third paragraph, initiated as follows: "By the foregoing, the jurors by (unanimity or majority) find the defendant ... guilty/not guilty of the crime of ...".

In this section you will make a separate statement for each offense and defendant. In the same way, they will decide, where appropriate, on the criterion of the Jury as to the application to the declared guilty of the benefits of conditional remission of the penalty to be imposed, for the case of the legal budgets to the effect, and on the request or no pardon in the statement.

d) A fourth paragraph, initiated as follows: "Jurors have served as elements of conviction to make the preceding statements to the following: ..." This section will contain a brief explanation of the reasons why you have declared or refused to declare certain facts as tested.

e) A fifth paragraph in which they shall record the incidents occurring during the deliberation, avoiding any identification that breaks the secret of the same, except for the refusal to vote.

2. The minutes shall be drawn up by the spokesman, unless he feels the majority opinion, in which case the juries shall appoint the editor.

If requested by the spokesman, the President-President may authorize the Secretary or an officer to assist him, strictly in the making or writing of the minutes. On the same terms, you may request the person who has been designated as a replacement.

3. The minutes will be signed by all juries, making it the spokesperson for whom you cannot do so. If any of the juries refuse to sign, the minutes shall be entered in the minutes.

Article 62. Reading of the verdict.

The minutes will be extended, they will be made aware of the President-President giving him a copy. Except where the return proceeds, in accordance with the provisions of the following Article, it shall convene the parties by a means enabling their immediate receipt to read the verdict in public hearing by the spokesman of the Jury.

Article 63. Return of the minutes to the Jury.

1. The President-President shall return the minutes to the Jury if, in the light of his copy, he appreciates any of the following circumstances:

a) That has not been pronounced on the totality of the facts.

b) That he has not spoken about the guilt or guilt of all the defendants and in respect of the totality of the criminal acts imputed.

c) That the necessary majority has not been obtained in any of the votes on those points.

d) That the various pronouncements are contradictory, either relative to the proven facts proven to each other, or the pronouncement of guilt with respect to such proven statement of facts.

e) That some relevant defect has been incurred in the deliberation and voting procedure.

2. If the act includes the statement of proof of a fact that, not being of the ones proposed by the Magistrate, implies a substantial alteration of these or determines a more serious liability than the imputed one, it will be unput.

3. Before returning the minutes, the procedure shall be carried out in the form set out in Article 53 of this Law.

Article 64. Justification for the return of the minutes.

1. At the time of returning the minutes, the Court, assisted by the Registrar and in the presence of the parties, the President-President shall carefully explain the reasons for the return and specify the manner in which the procedural defects or points on which new pronouncements are to be issued.

2. The Secretary shall extend the appropriate act to the Secretary-General.

Article 65. Dissolution of the Jury and new oral judgment.

1. If, after a third return, they remain without correcting the reported defects or the necessary majorities have not been obtained, the Jury will be dissolved and an oral trial will be called with a new Jury.

2. If the new trial does not result in a verdict by the second Jury, for any of the reasons set out in the previous paragraph, the President-President will dissolve the Jury and will give an absolute judgment.

Article 66. Termination of the Jury in his/her duties.

1. Read the verdict, the Jury will cease in its duties.

2. Until that time, the alternates shall have remained at the disposal of the Tribunal at the place indicated to them.

CHAPTER V

From the statement

Article 67. Guilty verdict.

If the verdict were of guilt, the President-President will dictate in the act of the defendant's absolute judgment to the defendant, ordering, if necessary, the immediate release.

Article 68. Guilty verdict.

When the verdict is guilty, the President-President will give the floor to the Prosecutor and other parties so that, in his order, they will report on the penalty or measures that must be imposed on each of the convicted and on civil liability. The report shall also refer to the concurrence of the legal budgets of the application of the conditional remission benefits, if the Jury has issued a favourable opinion to the latter.

Article 69. Minutes of the sessions.

1. The Registrar shall draw up the minutes of each sitting, stating in a succinct manner the most relevant of what has happened and in a literal manner the protests which have been made by the parties and the decisions of the President-President in respect of the incidents which were raised.

2. The minutes will be read at the end of each session, and will be signed by the President-President, the jurors and the lawyers of the parties.

Article 70. The contents of the statement.

1. The Magistrate-president will proceed to sentence in the manner ordered in article 248.3 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary, including, as proven facts and crime object of conviction or acquittal, the corresponding content of the verdict.

2. Also, if the verdict were guilty, the sentence will concretize the existence of proof of charge required by the constitutional guarantee of presumption of innocence.

3. The sentence, which will be joined by the jury's record, will be published and filed in legal form, extending in the cause's certification.

Additional disposition first. Suppression of the pleat.

Article 410 of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judiciary, and Title II of Book IV of the Law on Criminal Procedure are repealed.

Additional provision second. Criminal offences.

1. Juries who leave their functions without legitimate cause, or breach the obligations imposed on them by Articles 41.4 and 58.2 of this Law, will incur the penalty of a fine of 100,000 to 500,000 pesetas.

2. Juries who fail to comply with the obligations laid down in Article 55 (3) shall be subject to the maximum penalty of arrest and fine of 100 000 to 500 000 pesetas.

First transient disposition. Criminal causes in processing.

Criminal proceedings initiated or initiated by events occurring prior to the entry into force of this Law shall be dealt with before the competent court in accordance with the rules in force at the time of its occurrence. those.

Second transient disposition. Resource regime.

The system of remedies provided for in this Law will apply only to judicial decisions that are issued in proceedings initiated after its entry into force.

Transitional provision third. First list of candidates for juries.

The first list of candidates for juries, which will extend its effectiveness until 31 December 1996, will be obtained by applying the provisions of Articles 13, 14, 15 and 16 of this Law, although the references in they are made in September, October and November shall be understood as being made, respectively, within three months of the entry into force of this transitional provision.

Final disposition first. Amendment of the Organic Law of the Judiciary.

1. Article 73 (3) (c) of Organic Law 6/1985 of 1 July 1985 on the Judiciary, the present content of which becomes point (d) of the same paragraph, is worded as follows:

"c) Knowledge of appeals in cases provided for by law."

2. Article 83 (2) of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judiciary, is worded as follows:

" 2. The composition and competence of the Jury is regulated in the Organic Law of the Jury. "

Final disposition second. Amendment of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The articles and headings listed below are amended in the following terms:

1. A second subparagraph is added to the third paragraph of Article 14 with the following wording:

"However, in the case of jurisdiction of the Judge of the Criminal, if the offence is attributed to the Tribunal of the Jury, the knowledge and judgment shall correspond to it."

2. A second subparagraph is added to the fourth paragraph of Article 14 with the following wording:

"However, in the case of the jurisdiction of the Provincial Court, if the offence is attributed to the Tribunal of the Jury, the knowledge and judgment shall correspond to it."

3. A third paragraph is added to Article 306 with the following wording:

" As soon as the opening of the procedure for the proceedings is ordered before the Tribunal of the Jury, it will be brought to the attention of the Fiscal Ministry who will appear and will intervene in all the actions taken before the Court of Justice. that. "

4. A new Article 309 a is incorporated with the following wording:

" Article 309 bis.

When of the terms of the complaint or of the circumstantial relationship of the fact in the complaint, as well as when of any procedural action, it turns out against persons or persons determined the imputation of a crime, whose The Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Union, of the Court of Justice of the European Union, of the Court of Justice of the European Union allegedly charged.

The Prosecutor's Office, other parties, and the defendant in any case, will be able to urge them to do so, and the Judge must resolve in time for a hearing. If you do not do so, or dismiss the request, the parties may appeal directly to the Provincial Hearing that will resolve before eight days, seeking the report of the Instructor by the quickest means. "

5. A new article 504 bis 2 is incorporated with the following wording:

" Article 504 bis 2.

Since the detainee is placed at the disposal of the Judge of Instruction or Tribunal that is to be aware of the cause, he shall convene a hearing within the following seventy-two hours to the Prosecutor's Office, other parties personated and to the person, who must be assisted by the elected or appointed ex officio. The Prosecutor's Office and the defendant, assisted by his lawyer, shall be required to appear.

In that hearing, they may propose the means of evidence which may be carried out on the spot or within 24 hours, without in any case exceeding the 70 and two hours indicated above.

If, in such a hearing, any party is interested in hearing the allegations of all those who are present, the Judge shall decide whether or not the prison or provisional freedom may be held. If neither party urges him, the Judge will necessarily agree to the cessation of the arrest and immediate release of the accused.

If for any reason the appearance could not be held, the Judge will agree to the prison or provisional freedom, if the budgets are present and estimate the risk of escape; but he must again call it within the following Seventy-two hours, taking the disciplinary measures to be taken in connection with the cause of non-celebration of the appearance.

Against resolutions that are issued on the origin or not of the provisional freedom goat appeal to the Provincial Court. "

6. Article 516 is without content.

7. Article 539 is worded as follows:

" Article 539.

The prison and bail and bail cars will be reformable throughout the course of the cause.

In consequence, the defendant may be imprisoned and released as many times as possible, and the bail may be modified as necessary to ensure the consequences of the trial.

In order to agree on the prison or provisional freedom of those who are at liberty or to aggravate the conditions of the provisional freedom already agreed upon, a request from the Prosecutor's Office or from some accusing party will be required. prior to the holding of the hearing referred to in Article 504 (2

.

However, if, in the judgment of the Judge or Tribunal, there is a risk of absconding, it will give a self-order of reform of the precautionary measure, or even of imprisonment, if the defendant is at liberty, but must convene, within the the following seventy-two hours, at the indicated appearance.

Whenever the Judge or the Court finds that freedom or the modification of the provisional freedom in more favourable terms to the measure is appropriate, it may, at any time, be of its own motion and without being subjected to party request. "

8. The third paragraph of Article 676 is worded as follows:

" Against the order of the declinatory and against which it admits the exceptions 2.a, 3.a and 4.a of the article 666, the appeal of appeal proceeds. Against him who dismisses them, no recourse shall be given unless he has brought the judgment, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 678. "

9. A second paragraph is added to Article 678 with the following wording:

"The foregoing shall not apply to the causes of the Tribunal of the Jury, without prejudice to what may be alleged in the appeal against the judgment."

10. In Article 780, a new third paragraph is incorporated with the following wording:

" Initiated a process in accordance with the rules of this Law, as soon as it appears that the fact could constitute a crime whose prosecution is the jurisdiction of the Tribunal of the Jury, the provisions of articles 309 a or 789.3, second and third paragraphs of this Law. "

The current third paragraph of that article becomes the fourth paragraph of that article.

11. A final paragraph is added to Article 781 with the following wording:

" As soon as the opening of the procedure for the proceedings is ordered before the Tribunal of the Jury, it will be brought to the attention of the Prosecutor's Office who will appear and intervene in all the actions taken before the Court of Justice. that. "

12. In Article 789, paragraph 3, two new paragraphs are inserted with the following wording:

" When of the terms of the complaint or of the circumstantial relationship of the fact in the complaint, as well as when of any procedural actions ordered according to the previous paragraph, it is against person or persons determined the imputation of a crime, the prosecution of which is attributed to the Court of Justice, the Judge shall proceed to the opening of the procedure provided for in his law, in which, in the manner in which it is established, the law shall immediately be brought into imputation of the allegedly charged.

The Prosecutor's Office, other parties, and the defendant in any case, will be able to urge them to do so, and the Judge must resolve in time for a hearing. If you do not do so, or dismiss the petition, the parties may complain to the Provincial Hearing that will resolve before eight days, collecting the Instructor's report by the quickest means. "

13. The V Book has the following name: "From appeals, appeal and review".

14. A new Title I, entitled 'The appeal against judgments and certain cars', is incorporated into the Fifth Book and consists of the following Articles:

" Article 846a a).

The sentences handed down, in the field of the Provincial Hearing and in the first instance, by the Magistrate-President of the Tribunal of the Jury, will be appealed to the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the the corresponding Autonomous Community.

The orders of the President-in-Office of the Court of Jury shall also be appealed when they agree to the dismissal, whatever their class, and those that are dealt with by resolving matters referred to in Article 36 of the Organic Law of the Tribunal of the Jury as well as in the cases referred to in Article 676 of this Law.

The Civil and Criminal Chamber will be composed, to learn of this resource, of three Magistrates.

Article 846a b).

Both the Tax Ministry and the sentenced person and the other parties may bring the action within 10 days of the last notification of the judgment.

The party that has not appealed within the stated time limit may make an appeal in the impeachment proceedings, but this appeal will be made subject to the principal appellant maintaining his.

Article 846a c).

The appeal must be based on one of the following reasons:

(a) That in the proceedings or in the judgment has been incurred in breach of the rules and procedural guarantees, which I shall cause to be defenseless, if the appropriate claim of remedy has been made. This claim will not be necessary if the reported infringement involves the violation of a constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right.

For these purposes, they may be alleged, without prejudice to others: those related to Articles 850 and 851, the references to the Magistrates of the numbers 5 and 6 of the latter being understood as also made to the juries; the existence of defects in the verdict, either by bias in the instructions given to the Jury or defect in the proposal of the object of the one, provided that it is derived indefencelessness, either for the sake of the reasons of those that should have given place to its return to the Jury and this would not have been ordered.

b) That the judgment has been in breach of constitutional or legal precept in the legal qualification of the facts or in the determination of the penalty, or of the security measures or of the civil liability.

c) That the jury's dissolution has been requested for the absence of proof of charge, and such a request has been improperly dismissed.

d) That the dissolution of the Jury should have been agreed and not proceed.

e) That the right to the presumption of innocence would have been infringed because, in the light of the evidence practiced in the trial, the sentence imposed is without any reasonable basis.

In the cases referred to in points (a), (c) and (d), in order for the appeal to be admissible, the appropriate protest must have been made at the time of the reported infringement.

Article 846a d).

In writing, the appeal will be transferred, after the end of the appeal, to the other parties, which, within five days, may make an appeal subject to appeal. If they are interposed, they shall be transferred to the other parties.

Concluded the term of five days without any such appeal being made, or, if the transfer to the other parties was made, all before the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the High Court of Justice which are to be personified within ten days.

If the principal appellant does not stand or manifest his resignation from the appeal, the cars will be returned to the Provincial Court, declaring the judgment firmly and proceeding to its execution.

Article 846a e).

The appellant will be indicated by day for the hearing of the appeal, citing the parties personated and, in any case, the convicted and third civil person.

The hearing will be held in public hearing, beginning with the use of the word the appellant followed by the Fiscal Ministry, if this is not the one that appealed, and other parties appealed.

If an appeal has been made subject to appeal, this party will intervene after the main appellant, which, if it does not resign, will be able to replicate it.

Article 846 bis f).

Within five days of the hearing, a judgment must be given, which, if it considers the appeal for some of the reasons referred to in points (a) and (d) of Article 846a 3, shall send the cause back to the Hearing for a new trial.

The other assumptions will dictate the appropriate resolution. "

15. The present Titles I and II of Book V become Titles II and III, respectively, of the same Book.

16. Article 847 is worded as follows:

" Article 847.

The appeal for infringement of law and for infringement of form against: (a) the judgments handed down by the Civil and Criminal Court of the High Courts of Justice in a single or second instance; and (b) the sentences handed down by the Provincial Hearings in oral judgment and single instance. "

17. The first paragraph of Article 848 is worded as follows:

" Against the orders issued, either on appeal by the Civil and Criminal Chambers of the High Courts of Justice or on a definitive basis by the Audiences, only the appeal, and only for infringement of the law, in cases where the law expressly authorizes it. "

Final disposition third. Character of the Act.

This Law is organic with the exception of Chapter III, the second transitional provision and paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 of the second final provision which have the character of ordinary law.

Final disposition fourth.

Within one year, from the approval of this Law, the Government will send to the Courts General, a draft law amending the Law on Criminal Procedure, generalizing the procedural criteria established in the the law and in which it establishes a procedure based on the principles of charge and contradiction between the parties, provided for in the Constitution, also simplifying the investigation process in order to avoid excessive prolongation.

Also, in this period, the necessary legal reforms will be adopted to adapt the Statute and the functions of the Prosecutor's Office to such a procedure, and the General Courts and the Government will be empowered by the material means, necessary technicians and humans.

Final disposition fifth. Entry into force.

This Organic Law shall enter into force six months after its publication in the "Official Gazette of the State", with the exception of the provisions of Chapter II thereof and in its third transitional provision, which shall enter into force on the two months of such publication.

Therefore,

I command all Spaniards, individuals and authorities to keep and keep this Organic Law.

Madrid, 22 May 1995.

JOHN CARLOS R.

The President of the Government,

FELIPE GONZÁLEZ MARQUEZ