Criminal Lawyers in Bribery

Bribery regulated in Arts. 419-427 CP is one of the paradigmatic offences against Public Administration, typifying the corruption of public officials through gifts, presents, offers or promises in exchange for acts of office. The protected legal interest is triple: the correct and objective functioning of Public Administration under Art. 103 of the Constitution, the impartiality of the exercise of public functions, and the institutional trust of citizens in the rectitude of public service. The Criminal Code distinguishes four main modalities: own bribery (act contrary to duties of office, Art. 419), improper bribery (act proper of office, Art. 420), subsequent bribery (later reward, Art. 421) and active bribery (by the corrupting individual, Art. 424). Consolidated Supreme Court case-law has developed technical criteria on each modality.

The methods of commission are extraordinarily varied. Active bribery by the individual (Art. 424 CP) sanctions whoever delivers or offers gift or reward of any kind to an authority or public official to perform an act contrary or proper to their office. Own passive bribery (Art. 419) punishes the official who requests or receives gift, favour or reward to perform an act contrary to the duties inherent to their office. Improper passive bribery (Art. 420) sanctions the official who requests or receives gift for an act proper of their office. "Gifts" include not only money, but any advantage: gifts, trips, discounts, sexual favours, future employment, benefits for relatives. Transnational bribery of Art. 286 ter CP sanctions bribery to foreign officials or those of international organisations (transposition of the OECD Convention). Concurrence with other offences is usual: prevarication, embezzlement, fraud and illegal exactions, influence peddling.

The penalties are severe and graduated by modality. Own bribery of Art. 419 (act contrary to duties of office) carries 3 to 6 years prison, fine from the same to triple the value of the gift and special disqualification from public employment or office and from the exercise of the right to passive suffrage for 9 to 12 years. Improper bribery of Art. 420 (act proper of office) carries 2 to 4 years prison, fine and disqualification of 5 to 9 years. Subsequent bribery of Art. 421 (later reward) has penalties similar to improper bribery. Active bribery by the individual (Art. 424) is punished with the same penalties as the corresponding passive bribery. Civil liability ex delicto includes restitution of gifts and compensation for patrimonial and reputational damages caused to the harmed administration. The criminal liability of the legal entity of Art. 31 bis CP is applicable when bribery benefits the company, with sanctions of fine, dissolution, suspension of activities and disqualification from contracting with the Administration.

The technical defense in bribery is built on four consolidated axes. First, the distinction between criminal gift and courtesy gift: socially accepted gifts of low value in institutional contexts (Public Sector Ethical Rules, Administration code of conduct) do not integrate the offence; expert evidence on the value of the good and institutional context may be decisive. Second, the absence of causal relation between the delivery of the good and a concrete administrative act: when the "do ut des" characteristic of bribery (conditioned exchange) is not proven, typicity fails. Third, the challenge of unlawful evidence: telephone interceptions without adequate judicial authorisation, surveillance without legal authorisation, recordings obtained with violation of the right to privacy or to the secrecy of communications are null and drag the nullity of derived evidence. Fourth, atypicity by error: error of type on the condition of public official or on the nature of the act, error of prohibition on the lawfulness of the exchange.

In current forensic practice, bribery proceedings concentrate on four typical scenarios: urban corruption (license granting, planning modifications), public procurement corruption (directed awards, overprices, fractionings), police corruption (payments not to draw up records or for preferential treatment) and international corruption in operations of Spanish companies with foreign officials. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, Act 9/2017 on Public Sector Contracts, Act 19/2013 on Transparency, the international Conventions (Mérida UN Convention against Corruption, OECD Convention on transnational bribery, Council of Europe Convention) and consolidated Supreme Court case-law configure the normative framework. Cooperation with the Special Prosecutor's Office against Corruption and Organised Crime, the Civil Guard's UCO and the National Police's UDEF orients the investigation. At Alonso Sala, with 15+ years' experience, we undertake specialised technical defence articulating challenge of evidence, technical expert evidence, analysis of institutional context and, where appropriate, advice on anti-corruption Compliance programmes.