The flaws of the Scilingo judgment

Journal of International Criminal Justice

Volumn 3, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 1082-1091

  Gil Gil, Alicia ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE EDUCACIÓN A DISTANCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 31044456287     PISSN: 14781387     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jicj/mqi077     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. See Judgment, Krstić (IT-38-93), Appeals Chamber, 19 April 2004, § 218 ff.
2. The same opinion in A. Gil Gil, Derecho penal international (Madrid: Tecnos, 1999), 305 et seq.
3. and A. Gil Gil, 'Comentario a la primera sentencia del Tribunal Supremo alemán condenando por el delito de genocidio', Revista de Derecho penal y Criminología UNED, no. 4 (1999), at 798.
4. In my opinion, it cannot be maintained that up until 1 October 2004, the definition of genocide in Art. 607 of the Spanish Penal Code incorporated into domestic criminal law the international custom regulating crimes against humanity. It can only be said that until that date, there were shortcomings in the Spanish legal system with regard to these crimes.
5. In my opinion, classifying the alleged acts as terrorist crimes according to the Spanish Penal Code is questionable.
6. Grupo de Estudios de Política Criminal, Una propuesta de Justicia penal internacional, Documentos, no. 6, 2002, at 33;
7. A. Gil Gil, Commentario, supra note 1, at 787.
8. See A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 87, note 105, with subsequent quotes and sentences of the Spanish Tribunal Constitucional, 25/1984, 23 February; 3/1988, 21 January; 101/1988, 8 June; 29/1989, 6 February; 69/ 1989, 20 April; 150/1989, 25 September; 219/1989, 21 December, etc.
9. See A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 93 et seq.
10. See A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 95 et seq.
11. The Spanish legal doctrine takes the view that the provisions defining crimes against humanity in the Rome Statute are incompatible with the requirement of specificity imposed by the nullum crimen principle, which has led to the replacement of certain undefined elements in the Rome Statute definitions by more specific conduct when the category of crimes against humanity was introduced into the Spanish Penal Code.
12. See Grupo de Estudios de Política Criminal, supra note 4, at 32, 38 and 39.
13. The origin and evolution of the concept of 'crimes against humanity' have been a significant victory over the principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs and is the result of many years of progress;
14. see A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 106.
15. We must also keep in mind that we are not really discussing here whether the conduct imputed to the accused was clearly prohibited both in the Argentinean and the Spanish criminal codes by the time the facts occurred (to kill somebody was evidently prohibited in both criminal codes), but whether we can apply to the accused a legal provision of the Spanish criminal code that came into force in 2004 and that regulates a crime more serious than homicide or murder. Against the argument that only a pre-existing prohibition of the basic conduct is necessary,
16. see also E. Malarino, in Persecución penal nacional de crímenes internacionales en América Latina y España (Montevideo: Max Planck Institut, Konrad Adenauer, 2003), at 59-60.
17. See the opinions of Jiménez de Asúa, Cerezo Mir, Gimeno Sendra, etc. cited by A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 66 et seq.
18. For example, the AN states that the nullum crimen originally protected the individual from the state but did not protect criminals that initiate massive attacks on the most fundamental rights of the citizen.
19. For arguments to the contrary, see E. Malarino, supra note 9, at 53.
20. The principle and associated guarantees are applied to protect everyone in the same way and when we begin to make exceptions to principles, they forfeit their status and quality as general principles, thereby risking a serious breach of the rule of law.
21. See A. Gil Gil, Derecho, supra note 1, at 87.
22. Ibid., at 88.
23. Article 24.
24. See also E. Malarino, supra note 9, at 53.
25. See Arts 93-96 of the SC, paying particular attention to Art. 95. In the same direction regarding Argentinean Law, see E. Malarino, supra note 9, at 53, and the dissenting opinions of the Judges Belluscio, Fayt and Vázquez and the judgment of the Argentinean Supreme Court, dated 24 August 2004 (Arancibia Chabel case).
26. J. Cerezo, Curso de Derecho penal español, Vol. 1 (Madrid: Tecnos, 2004), 207;
27. G. Rodríguez Mourullo, in Nueva Enciclopedia Jurídica, t. XVI (Barcelona, 1971), at 890;
28. Grupo de Estudios de Política Criminal, supra note 4, at 32, in reference to the scarce precision of the penalties in the Rome Statute.
29. This point has already been discussed by C. Tomuschat in his article, 'Issues of Universal Jurisdiction in the Scilingo Case', in this issue and in my commentary, 'La sentencia de la Audiencia Nacional en el caso Scilingo', Revista Electrónica de Ciencia Penal y Criminología (2005), No. 07-r1, where readers may find further details.
30. Legal commentators had suggested to the legislature to introduce these crimes into the LOPJ: See Grupo de Estudios de Política Criminal, supra note 4, at 57;
31. Gil Gil, in Cuadernos de Doctrina y Jurisprudencia penal, n. 8 C, 513. This suggestion was not, however, acted upon.
32. See Arts 27, 28 and 29 of the PC.
33. J. Cerezo, supra note 17, at 213.
34. The tribunal accepts as valid the depositions made before the examining magistrate in 1997 but not those made to the Chamber during the oral proceedings, in which the accused retracted all previous confessions.
35. The judgment, however, states that it has been proved that Scilingo threw bodies into the sea, although it fails to mention specific numbers or the evidence on which this conclusion is grounded.
36. See E. Gimbernat Ordeig, Autor y Cómplice en Derecho penal (Madrid: Universidad, 1966), 78 et seq.
37. See decisions of the Supreme Court of 25 January 1977 and 21 December 1988.
38. See A. Gil Gil, Persecución penal nacional de crímenes internacionales en América Latina y España (Montevideo: Max Planck Institut, Konrad Adenauer, 2003), at 397.