Security Measures In Criminal Law

Security measures in criminal law

Introduction

The security measures are about all those sanctions imposed that are characterized by being of a preventive nature and are imposed on a subject taking into account their degree of danger, they intend to prevent possible future criminal conduct by the subject and with it they have how they haveobjective the reeducation and reintegration of the subject in question, in addition to a radical change in terms of their behavior. These also usually have a therapeutic purpose, which through the use of a series of medical treatments that are appropriate to the pathologies presented by the subject.

Developing

Security measures derive as a substitute for what the penalties would come, therefore they have no comparison point with the latter. Since, while the penalty is the sanction and persecution of a criminal attitude, security measures make recognition of the subject and try to establish a series of withholdings to avoid the commission of a crime in the future without any sanction to the same, in addition to the provisions of article 6.2 of the Criminal Code are at no time, they can be “neither more burdensome nor of longer duration” than if a penalty was applied from the fact committed.

Unable to exceed the top of what is necessary to prevent dangerous behavior in the future. These are divided into two types of different purposes: the deprivative of liberty and non -deprivation of liberty: the deprivation of liberty are given the distinction between three types of internment centers of the subject: the psychiatric centers, the detoxification centers and the centersof special education.

Although they lack the subject of freedom, they still do not be comparable to what is stipulated in penalties, since they do not possess the same nature. Therefore, the accused will not be able to leave these centers until he complies with the sentence.

Or that the corresponding judge or court authorizes said exit (art. 97 CP). And non -deprivation of liberty are regulated and numbered in article 96.3 of the Criminal Code which are: 1st professional disqualification, 2nd the expulsion from Spain to the non -legally residents, 3rd freedom under surveillance, 4th in family custody if it will accept, 5th prohibition of circulation through motor vehicles, and 6th prohibition of tenureand weapon. Regarding its implementation, the jurisprudential doctrine offers three hypotheses that must be taken into account when imposing: that the subject has committed an expected fact as a crime.

And that your mental and personal circumstances are reason to give indications to commit future crimes (art. 95.1 CP). "Inimputability or semi -imputability condition": With regard to imputability, which is given to the subject the condition of imputability would be applied if it was necessary to hospitalize in adequate establishments to achieve its reeducation or its favorable recovery by means of medical treatment, without exceeding theTime that would have lasted if the private penalty had been applied (arts. 101.1, 102.1, 103.1 and 105 CP). While in the semi -imputability condition (art. 104 CP) We are established that the courts.

In addition to the provisions of imputability conditions, convenient penalties may also apply as the case may be;But the subject’s internment provisions will be applicable if the penalty is deprivation of liberty, which may not last more than the provisions for the crime. But, if there was some kind of coincidence between penalty and security measure (art. 99 cp) The courts would send compliance with the measures, but once the judge is raised, the judge can “suspend compliance with the rest of the penalty for a period not exceeding the duration of the same” if the results achieved.

Objectively weighing the danger of the subject, jurisprudence estimates the assessment of the same by means of a double sanity: Danger diagnosis: that is basically based on the danger that the subject’s behavior would mean for society;This diagnosis can have different scopes based on the eventuality and the nature of the crime made. Future forecast: which, as indicated by its name, is about the west of the probabilities that the subject in question can commit some criminal act again, and, as far as possible to prevent that behavior.

conclusion

The duration of security measures must be linked to the criteria of proportionality and need. This, of course, is set in the judgment issued by the judge or court. The Criminal Code does not establish an approximate duration of the established measures, but, as mentioned above, it does indicate in what cases the measures may be a deprivation or non -deprivation in the subject’s liberties. Although if it had to give an approximate figure it would be the equivalent of the stipulated in the case of what was established with the penalty. Nature of security measures.