The Crime Against Moral Integrity Under Article 173.1 CP: Degrading Treatment, Mobbing and Harassment

Title VII of Book II of the Spanish Criminal Code (CP) groups together in articles 173 to 177 CP the offenses of torture and crimes against moral integrity. The central figure is degrading treatment under article 173.1 CP, punished with six months to two years in prison, but the same provision also covers workplace harassment, housing-related harassment and the concealment of a corpse's whereabouts, while articles 174 to 176 CP reserve harsher penalties for authorities and public officials. We examine each offense and its defense.

What the crime against moral integrity protects

Moral integrity is an autonomous protected interest, distinct from physical integrity, health and honor. Spanish case law identifies it with human dignity: the right not to be humiliated, debased or treated as a mere object. This is why the offense under article 173.1 CP can be committed without causing any physical injury: what is punished is the degradation itself. Hence the rule of article 177 CP: any accompanying injury is punished separately.

Our firm has a dedicated practice area for defense in crimes against moral integrity, for persons under investigation and for victims.

Degrading treatment under article 173.1 CP: elements and penalty

The first paragraph of article 173.1 CP punishes anyone who inflicts degrading treatment on another person, seriously undermining their moral integrity, with six months to two years in prison. Three elements emerge from the statutory wording:

• Degrading treatment: conduct that humiliates or debases the victim. It may be a single act of sufficient intensity or a succession of acts which, taken together, create a degrading situation.
• A serious impairment of moral integrity: the law expressly requires seriousness. This is the essential filter: not every vexatious or inconsiderate treatment is a crime; minor humiliations and ordinary conflicts fall outside the offense.
• A causal link between the conduct and the impairment, proven with specific evidence.

With a maximum penalty of two years in prison, the crime under article 173.1 CP becomes time-barred after five years, and a defendant with no criminal record may seek the suspension of any prison sentence imposed.

Concealing a corpse, workplace mobbing and housing harassment

The subsequent paragraphs of article 173.1 CP criminalize, with the same penalty of six months to two years in prison, three specific offenses:

• Concealing the whereabouts of a corpse: the provision punishes those who, knowing where a person's body is, repeatedly conceal that information from the deceased's relatives or close ones.
• Workplace harassment (mobbing): the offense targets those who, within an employment or civil-service relationship and taking advantage of a position of superiority, repeatedly carry out hostile or humiliating acts which, without amounting to degrading treatment, constitute serious harassment of the victim. It requires abuse of superiority, repetition and seriousness; see our guide on when mobbing becomes a crime.
• Housing-related harassment: the same penalty applies to anyone who repeatedly carries out hostile or humiliating acts which, without amounting to degrading treatment, are aimed at preventing the legitimate enjoyment of a person's home. It protects tenants and owners from utility cut-offs, abusive works or pressure to force them out; see our analysis of real estate harassment against tenants.

Article 173.1 CP also provides for the criminal liability of legal entities: a company liable under article 31 bis CP faces a fine of six months to two years, plus, potentially, the penalties of article 33.7 CP letters b) to g).

Differences with minor vexations and with psychological injury

Two distinctions concentrate most of the courtroom debate:

1. Degrading treatment versus minor vexation. Seriousness is the dividing line. Article 173.4 CP punishes minor unjust vexation or insult only when the victim is one of the family members listed in article 173.2 CP, with non-custodial penalties (permanent localization or community service of five to thirty days, or a fine of one to four months), and prosecution requires the victim's complaint. Outside that circle, conduct below the threshold of article 173.1 CP may fall outside the CP.

2. Moral integrity versus psychological injury. The crime against moral integrity does not require a clinically diagnosed psychological harm: it punishes the humiliation itself. If the degrading treatment additionally impairs the victim's mental health, that result may constitute a separate offense of causing injury, which article 177 CP orders to be punished separately. Hence the importance of psychological expert reports in these proceedings.

Article 173.2 CP, in turn, criminalizes habitual physical or psychological violence within the family (six months to three years in prison); we examine it in our comparative guide on article 153 versus article 173.2 CP.

Torture and public officials: articles 174, 175 and 176 CP

When the offender is an authority or public official, the CP increases the response:

• Torture (article 174 CP): committed by the authority or public official who, abusing their position and with a specific purpose (obtaining a confession or information, punishing an act committed or suspected, or discrimination), subjects a person to conditions or procedures that cause physical or mental suffering or otherwise attack their moral integrity. The penalty is two to six years in prison if the attack is serious and one to three years if it is not, plus absolute disqualification for eight to twelve years in every case. Article 174.2 CP extends these penalties to officials of prisons and juvenile centers.
• The residual offense of article 175 CP: an authority or public official who, abusing their position and outside the cases of article 174, attacks a person's moral integrity faces two to four years in prison if the attack is serious and six months to two years if it is not, plus special disqualification from public employment or office for two to four years.
• Permitting the abuse (article 176 CP): the same penalties apply to the authority or official who, in breach of the duties of their office, allows other persons to carry out the acts described above.

The concurrence rule of article 177 CP and penalty table

Article 177 CP sets an express concurrence rule: if, in addition to the attack on moral integrity, injury or damage is caused to the life, physical integrity, health, sexual freedom or property of the victim or a third party, the acts are punished separately, except where that attack is already specially punished by law. The attack on dignity therefore does not absorb accompanying injuries, sexual assaults or damage: the penalties are added.

Provision	Conduct	Penalty
Art. 173.1 CP	Degrading treatment; concealing a corpse; workplace harassment; housing harassment	6 months to 2 years in prison (legal entities: fine of 6 months to 2 years)
Art. 173.2 CP	Habitual violence within the family	6 months to 3 years in prison + deprivation of the right to keep and carry weapons for 3 to 5 years
Art. 174 CP	Torture by an authority or public official	2 to 6 years in prison (serious) or 1 to 3 years (not serious) + absolute disqualification for 8 to 12 years
Art. 175 CP	Attack on moral integrity outside art. 174	2 to 4 years in prison (serious) or 6 months to 2 years (not serious) + special disqualification for 2 to 4 years
Art. 176 CP	Authority or official who permits the above acts	The same penalties as the preceding articles

The full text is available in the Criminal Code published in the BOE.

Criminal defense: how an accusation under article 173.1 CP is contested

These accusations are decided on three fronts:

• The seriousness of the conduct. This is the main battleground for the defense: showing that the conduct, however unfortunate, does not reach the threshold of serious impairment the offense requires. An isolated episode or a legitimate business decision is not enough.
• Proof of the impairment and of repetition. In the workplace and housing harassment forms, the law requires repeated acts; the defense must examine whether the prosecution identifies specific, dated and proven acts or relies on generic assessments. Expert reports, direct witnesses and documentation (messages, files, medical reports) are decisive either way.
• Alternative legal classifications. The facts may be reclassified as a minor vexation under article 173.4 CP (family sphere only, upon the victim's complaint), as an employment or civil dispute with no criminal relevance, or absorbed by another offense already specially punished. Conversely, when acting for the victim, we document repetition and seriousness to prevent dismissal.

If you are under investigation for a crime against moral integrity, or you have suffered degrading treatment or harassment in Spain, Alonso Sala, a criminal law firm in Madrid with +15 years of experience, can help. Call us at +34 91 078 65 74 and we will review your case.