Article 172 bis Spanish Criminal Code: Forced Marriage (2026)

Article 172 bis of the Spanish Criminal Code (CP) makes forced marriage a stand-alone criminal offence: compelling another person to enter into marriage through violence or serious intimidation. It sits among the offences against liberty, next to coercion, and was introduced to implement the Istanbul Convention and European rules on protection against violence towards women. As criminal defence lawyers specialising in forced marriage cases, we explain what Article 172 bis actually punishes, the penalties it carries and where the lines of defence lie.

What Article 172 bis Says

The provision contains two offences and two complementary rules:

• Art. 172 bis.1 — Basic offence: compelling another person to enter into marriage through serious intimidation or violence. Penalty: imprisonment of 6 months to 3 years and 6 months, or a fine of 12 to 24 months, depending on the seriousness of the coercion or the means used.
• Art. 172 bis.2 — Removal or retention abroad: the same penalty for anyone who, with the purpose of imposing the marriage, uses violence, serious intimidation or deception to force another person to leave Spanish territory or not to return to it.
• Art. 172 bis.3 — Underage victims: the penalties are imposed in their upper half where the victim is a minor.
• Art. 172 bis.4 — Civil rulings: the convicting judgment must also rule, where appropriate, on the annulment or dissolution of the marriage, filiation and maintenance.

Forced marriage is, in essence, an aggravated form of coercion: compared with the general offence of coercion under Article 172 CP, the legislator raises the maximum prison term to 3 years and 6 months and adds specific rules on minors, cross-border removals and the civil effects of the imposed marriage.

The Elements of the Offence

Three elements must be present for the basic offence:

1. Restricted means: violence or serious intimidation. Not every form of pressure qualifies: the intimidation must be serious enough to override the victim's will. Diffuse family pressure or cultural reproach, without a serious threat, falls outside the offence.
2. The intended result: that the victim enters into marriage without free consent. The protected legal interest is the freedom to decide on one's own civil status.
3. Intent: the offender must knowingly seek to impose the marriage through those means. Close relatives are often the ones charged, but the offence does not require any family relationship.

One decisive nuance: in the basic offence, deception is not a qualifying means. Talking someone into a marriage with lies may have other legal consequences, but it does not amount to art. 172 bis.1 CP, which requires violence or serious intimidation. Deception only appears in paragraph 2, in connection with taking the victim abroad.

Taking the Victim Abroad (Art. 172 bis.2)

Paragraph 2 addresses a real-world pattern that is especially relevant for international families living in Spain: the victim — often a young woman whose family has ties to another country — is taken abroad under a pretext (a holiday, a family visit) and is then pressed into a marriage there, or prevented from returning to Spain until she agrees. The Criminal Code punishes this preparatory stage with the same penalty as the basic offence, and here it does include deception alongside violence and serious intimidation.

Two practical consequences:

• The paragraph 2 offence is complete with the forced removal or retention carried out for that purpose, even if the marriage is never celebrated.
• The conduct may coexist with other offences — unlawful detention, threats, coercion — whose concurrence has to be assessed case by case.

Penalties for Forced Marriage

Article 172 bis.1 CP provides alternative penalties, the choice depending on the seriousness of the coercion or the means used:

• Imprisonment of 6 months to 3 years and 6 months, or
• A fine of 12 to 24 months (under Spain's day-fine system).

The alternative nature of the penalty matters for the defence: in less serious cases it is possible to argue for the fine instead of imprisonment. The same range applies to the removal-abroad modality of paragraph 2.

Aggravation: Underage Victims

Where the victim is a minor, art. 172 bis.3 CP imposes the penalties in their upper half: imprisonment of 2 years to 3 years and 6 months, or a fine of 18 to 24 months. The aggravation reflects the particular vulnerability of minors to pressure from their family environment — precisely the setting in which this offence usually occurs.

Moreover, if a minor is recruited, transferred or harboured for the purposes of a forced marriage, the case may be reclassified as human trafficking: under art. 177 bis.2 CP those acts committed against minors for exploitation purposes amount to trafficking even without violence, intimidation or deception, and art. 177 bis.4.b raises the penalty to the next degree.

Forced Marriage and Human Trafficking (Art. 177 bis CP)

The celebration of forced marriages is one of the express purposes of human trafficking: art. 177 bis.1.e CP punishes with 5 to 8 years' imprisonment anyone who recruits, transports, transfers, harbours or receives a person — through violence, intimidation or deception, or by abusing a position of superiority or the victim's situation of need or vulnerability — for that purpose.

Distinguishing the two offences is one of the key technical questions in these proceedings:

• Art. 172 bis CP: punishes the imposition of the marriage itself (or the forced removal abroad for that purpose). Maximum penalty: 3 years and 6 months.
• Art. 177 bis.1.e CP: punishes the process of recruiting and moving the victim for the purpose of a forced marriage. Penalty: 5 to 8 years, with higher penalties where the victim is a minor or especially vulnerable, or where a criminal organisation is involved.

Article 177 bis.9 CP itself states that trafficking penalties apply without prejudice to those for the offences actually committed, including those constituting the exploitation itself, which opens the door to cumulative convictions for trafficking and forced marriage. For the defence, preventing facts that amount to marriage-related coercion from being wrongly charged as trafficking — with the huge jump in sentencing that entails — is often the central objective. You can read more in our guide to the offence of human trafficking under Article 177 bis CP.

Annulment of the Marriage and Other Rulings

Article 172 bis.4 CP contains an unusual provision: the convicting judgment for forced marriage must include, in addition to the ruling on civil liability, the appropriate rulings on the annulment or dissolution of the marriage so contracted, on filiation and on maintenance. The criminal court thus resolves the civil effects of the imposed marriage in the conviction itself, sparing the victim a second set of proceedings. Marriages that are invalid on other grounds raise different issues: see our analysis of bigamy and illegal marriages under Article 217 CP.

Defence Strategies

1. No violence or serious intimidation: the offence requires restricted means of a certain gravity. Social or family pressure without a serious threat does not qualify.
2. Free consent of the spouses: proving that the marriage was arranged but consented to excludes the offence.
3. Deception is not enough for the basic offence: it is only a qualifying means in the removal-abroad modality of paragraph 2, not in paragraph 1.
4. Challenging the purpose of the trip: under paragraph 2, the prosecution must prove that the removal or retention was aimed at imposing a marriage.
5. Fighting a trafficking charge: where the acts and means of art. 177 bis CP are not present, the defence should steer the case back to art. 172 bis, with a far lower penalty.
6. Arguing for the fine: the alternative penalties allow the defence to press for a fine rather than imprisonment, depending on the seriousness of the coercion.