Criminal Lawyers for Crimes Against Liberty

Crimes against liberty (Title VI of Book II of the Spanish Criminal Code, Arts. 163 to 172 ter) protect one of the most essential personal legal interests: freedom of action and will-formation, derived from Art. 17.1 SC. They include illegal detention and kidnapping, threats, coercion and stalking. Supreme Court doctrine has consolidated that these types protect both freedom of movement (illegal detentions) and freedom of decision (threats and coercion) and the normal development of daily life (stalking). The reform introduced by Organic Law 1/2015 introduced the autonomous type of harassment (Art. 172 ter), responding to the social reality of repeated harassment, especially in contexts of sentimental breakup or cyberbullying.

The typical modalities present essential technical nuances. Threats (Arts. 169-171 CP) distinguish between unconditional (pure announcement of future harm) and conditional (demanding consideration), aggravable by use of weapons, digital mediation or gender violence concurrence. Coercion (Art. 172 CP) sanctions whoever, without being legitimately authorized, prevents another with violence from doing what the law does not prohibit or compels them to do what they do not want; case-law admits equivalence between physical violence and in rebus violence (utility cutoffs, lock changes). Stalking (Art. 172 ter CP) requires insistent and repeated surveillance, pursuit, search for physical proximity, unconsented contact or improper use of personal data, with the result of serious alteration of daily development. Paradigmatic cases are threats via WhatsApp and social media, lock changes in conflictive cohabitations and digital harassment after breakups.

The statutory penalties modulate by type and aggravators. Conditional threats with harm constituting a crime carry 1 to 5 years' prison (Art. 169.1 CP); unconditional, 6 months to 2 years. Threats with weapons or dangerous means, as well as those committed in writing, with publicity or by digital means, are imposed in their upper half. Serious coercion carries 6 months to 3 years' prison or 12 to 24 months' fine (Art. 172.1 CP); minor coercion in gender violence context, 6 months to 1 year (Art. 172.2 CP). Stalking is punished with 3 months to 2 years' prison or 6 to 24 months' fine, aggravated when the victim is vulnerable or a prior affective relationship exists. Additionally, restraining orders (Arts. 48 and 57 CP), communication prohibitions and special disqualification are habitual.

The technical defense articulates around four consolidated axes. First, context reconstruction: case-law requires the announcement of harm to be credible, serious and capable of altering the victim's life; expressions thrown in heated arguments may lack harm-suitability. Second, absence of effective violence or intimidation in coercion: legitimate exercise of rights (administrative complaints, civil demands, contractual enforcement) does not constitute coercion. Third, in stalking, the quantum of repetition: case-law requires systematic, not episodic, conduct that seriously alters daily life. Fourth, challenging digital evidence: unauthenticated screenshots, dumps without chain of custody and IP identifications without judicial coverage can be expelled from the evidentiary record (Art. 11 LOPJ and Art. 588 ter LECrim).

In current forensic practice we see a sustained increase in proceedings for threats, coercion and stalking in digital environments (WhatsApp, Instagram, Telegram), as well as in contexts of sentimental breakup, neighbor conflict and workplace harassment. Organic Law 10/2022 on Comprehensive Protection of Sexual Freedom, Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, Act 2/2023 on whistleblower protection and Supreme Court doctrine on electronic evidence configure a demanding framework. At Alonso Sala, with more than 15 years of experience, we approach each file reconstructing the complete context (witnesses, integral messaging, relational background), coordinating psychological expert evidence when relevant to assess credibility and harm-suitability of expressions, and surgically challenging digital evidence when guarantees are lacking. We also design proactive strategies of mediation, withdrawal of complaints by reconciliation or mitigating factors by damage reparation when convenient. We address threats, coercion, stalking, trespass and assault on authority.

Crimes against liberty are regulated in Title VI of the Criminal Code (Arts. 163-172 ter). Threats are classified as conditional and unconditional, with penalties ranging from fines to 5 years imprisonment if carried out with a weapon. Coercion punishes with 6 months to 3 years imprisonment those who force another to do what they don't want or prevent them from doing what they have the right to do. Stalking (Art. 172 ter), introduced in the 2015 reform, punishes insistent surveillance and pursuit conduct with up to 2 years imprisonment.

Trespass (Arts. 202-204) protects the inviolability of the home guaranteed by Art. 18.2 of the Constitution. Assault on authority (Arts. 550-556) protects the legitimate exercise of public functions, with penalties of 1 to 4 years if there is aggression against the officer. All these types are aggravated when gender or domestic violence circumstances concur.

Our experience has taught us that the key in these crimes lies in context. A "I'll kill you" shouted in a heated argument between neighbors does not carry the same criminal severity as a cold, calculated threat accompanied by a weapon. Our job is to demonstrate that context to the court through witnesses, recordings, relationship history between parties and, when necessary, psychological expert reports. In cases of assault on authority, we meticulously analyze recordings (body cameras, third-party phones) to determine whether the police action was proportionate and whether the client's reaction was truly an assault or a mere defensive reaction.