Extradition from Spain to the Dominican Republic: Treaty, Refusal and Procedure

Surrender between the two States is governed by the Treaty on Extradition and Judicial Assistance in Criminal Matters between Spain and the Dominican Republic, signed in Madrid on 4 May 1981, whose instrument of ratification was published in the BOE of 14 November 1984 and which has been in force since 20 November 1984. It is a classic text, stricter than others of its generation on the seriousness threshold, and it closes with a clause on penalties that does not appear in every treaty in the Spanish network.

If You Are Arrested in Spain on a Dominican Request

Files almost always open with an arrest sought as a matter of urgency, before the formal request is complete. Article 8 of Act 4/1985 of 21 March, on Passive Extradition (BOE of 26 March 1985), requires the detainee to be brought before the Central Investigating Court on duty within no more than twenty-four hours. That court does not try the facts: it verifies identity, informs the person of the request and rules on remand or release with measures to prevent flight.

It helps to be clear from that first hearing about what is actually in issue. Extradition does not decide whether the person committed the offence, but whether the treaty and statutory conditions for surrender are met. Arguments on the facts belong to the proceedings in the requesting State; what is argued here is identity, dual criminality, limitation, grounds for refusal and assurances.

The 1981 Bilateral Treaty

Neither the European Arrest Warrant, confined to EU member states, nor the 1957 European Convention on Extradition applies between Spain and the Dominican Republic. Cooperation runs through the bilateral treaty, which regulates extradition and judicial assistance in a single text. The document and its official publication can be consulted in our guide to Spain's extradition treaties, which also covers the two frameworks most often confused with this one: the treaty regime with the United States and the post-Brexit surrender arrangements with the United Kingdom.

For certain offences the treaty coexists with multilateral conventions. The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, done at New York on 15 November 2000 and published in the BOE of 29 September 2003, provides in its Article 16 for extradition between States Parties in respect of offences within its scope. The bilateral treaty, being the specific instrument, remains the reference framework.

Dual Criminality and a Threshold Above Two Years

Article 2 of the Treaty requires the conduct to be punishable, under the laws of both parties, by a custodial penalty whose maximum is more than two years. Where extradition is sought to enforce a judgment, the portion of the penalty still to be served must be no less than six months.

That bar is markedly higher than the one in Spanish domestic law, which is satisfied with one year at the upper end of the range, or four months of outstanding sentence. Where the treaty demands more, the treaty prevails. In files concerning offences of medium gravity — misappropriation, documentary forgery, fraud of modest amounts — comparing maximum penalties across the two systems stops being a formality and becomes a self-standing ground of opposition.

Grounds for Refusal Under the Treaty and Under Spanish Law

• Political offences (Article 4). Extradition is not granted for offences regarded as political by the requested party or connected with them. The article itself excludes from that classification a closed list of serious conduct, including the unlawful seizure of aircraft, serious attacks on persons, abduction and kidnapping.
• Nationals (Article 7). Where the requested person is a national of one of the parties, extradition is decided as the national law of the requested State provides. In Spain that reference is closed by Article 3 of Act 4/1985, which prohibits the surrender of Spanish nationals and that of foreign nationals for offences within the jurisdiction of the Spanish courts.
• Res judicata (Article 9). Surrender does not lie where the person has already been tried by the authorities of the requested party for the same facts underlying the request.
• Extinguished liability (Article 10). Limitation or any other ground of extinction under the law of either party bars extradition. In Spain the calculation is made under Article 131 CP, with periods running from five to twenty years depending on the maximum penalty attached to the offence.

Act 4/1985 adds its own catalogue. Article 4 bars surrender where the person is to be tried by an exceptional court, is being tried in Spain for the same facts, where criminal liability has been extinguished under Spanish law or under the law of the requesting State, or where refugee status has been recognised. Article 5 sets out discretionary grounds, including a well-founded suspicion that the request pursues a purpose other than the criminal one.

Death Penalty, Life Imprisonment and an Unusual Clause

Article 12 of the Treaty bars extradition where the conduct is punishable by the death penalty or by life imprisonment, unless the requested State first obtains from the requesting State sufficient assurances, given through diplomatic channels, that neither penalty will be imposed or that, if imposed, the penalty enforced will be the one immediately below life imprisonment.

What follows is the unusual part. The same article provides that, where those assurances are not obtained, the requested State will try the offences as if they had been committed on its own territory. It is an extradite-or-prosecute clause: the absence of assurances does not close the matter, it relocates it. For the defence that means planning with both scenarios on the table, because the alternative to surrender may be a trial in Spain rather than the end of the case.

How the File Is Handled in Spain

Act 4/1985 combines executive and judicial stages. The request arrives through diplomatic channels or from Minister of Justice to Minister of Justice (Article 7). The Ministry of Justice submits a reasoned proposal to the Government within eight days and the Government decides within fifteen whether the procedure continues before the courts (Article 9).

In the judicial stage, the requested person appears with a lawyer before the Central Investigating Court, which asks whether he or she consents to surrender; failing consent, the file goes up to the Criminal Chamber of the National Court (Article 12). The judge's decisions take the form of an order issued within twenty-four hours, subject only to an application for review. Prosecutor and defence examine the file for three days each (Article 13), the hearing takes place within the following fifteen days (Article 14) and the court rules by reasoned order within a non-extendable three days, with an appeal by way of súplica to the full Criminal Chamber (Article 15).

Article 6 fixes the effect of each outcome: a final judicial refusal means surrender can no longer be granted, while an order declaring extradition admissible does not bind the Government, which decides under Article 18. Article 21 preserves the rule of speciality: trying a surrendered person for earlier and different offences requires a supplementary authorisation processed as a fresh request.

Provisional Detention Periods

Article 19 of the Treaty allows provisional detention to be lifted if the requested party has not received the extradition request within forty-five days, and provides that it may in no case exceed sixty days. Domestic law runs alongside: Article 10 of Act 4/1985 lifts provisional custody once forty days have passed without a properly filed request, and allows a further forty where one is filed, subject to the ceiling in the Criminal Procedure Act.

These periods run from the arrest and are argued on the file. A delay in transmitting the request, incomplete documents or a defective translation may result in the release of the requested person even though the proceedings continue.

Outgoing Requests: When Spain Is the Requesting State

Where the accused or convicted person is in the Dominican Republic and a Spanish court seeks the surrender, Articles 824 to 833 LECrim apply. The request requires a reasoned remand order or a final judgment (Art. 825 LECrim) and lies only in the cases listed in Art. 826 LECrim; where a treaty is in force, in those it determines (Art. 827 LECrim). The court hearing the case is competent (Art. 828 LECrim), orders the request by reasoned decision (Art. 829 LECrim) and transmits it through the channel provided (Art. 831 LECrim), enclosing a certified copy of the extradition order and of the material justifying it (Art. 832 LECrim).

Preparing the Defence

• Compare maximum penalties. The two-year threshold in Article 2 is the sharpest filter in this treaty and must be verified in both systems, fact by fact.
• Check limitation twice over. Article 10 admits extinction under the law of either party.
• Scrutinise the documents: identification of the requested person, the decision relied on, authenticity and translation. Formal defects are real grounds, not filler.
• Anticipate the effect of Article 12. Where life imprisonment is possible, weigh both the sufficiency of the assurances and the prospect of a trial in Spain.
• Coordinate with the defence in the requesting State, because decisions taken there feed straight into the Spanish file.

Extradition admits no promises of outcome: it depends on the treaty, on the Act and on a final decision that combines a judicial stage with an executive one. What is within the defence's control is raising each ground while it can still succeed. If a request or a recent arrest concerns you, you can call us on +34 91 078 65 74, and there is more detail on our extradition and European Arrest Warrant defence page.