Disobedience to Authority Lawyer (Art. 556 CP)

Disobedience to authority is defined in Article 556 of the Spanish Criminal Code, within Title XXII on offences against public order. The provision punishes those who, without falling within the offence of assault, resist authority or its agents, or seriously disobey them, while they are acting in the exercise of their functions. It also penalises anyone who disobeys or resists private security personnel cooperating with the State Security Forces. This is one of the offences most frequently charged in the context of police checks, demonstrations, evictions or judicial orders, and its correct classification requires a rigorous distinction between the criminal offence and a simple administrative infraction.

Typical Conduct: Resistance and Disobedience

Article 556 CP covers two forms of conduct. Resistance is non-violent physical or merely obstructive opposition to a lawful order: slight struggling, going limp on the ground, clinging to objects or hindering the agent's action without amounting to a genuine assault. Serious disobedience is the conscious and deliberate failure to comply with a specific and firm order: refusing to identify oneself, to disperse a gathering, to leave a place, to hand over documents or to comply with a judicial order. When the opposition is accompanied by aggression, attack or serious intimidation, the facts leave Article 556 and become the offence of assault on authority under Article 550 CP, carrying significantly higher penalties.

Requirements of the Offence of Disobedience

The doctrine of the Supreme Court requires, for disobedience to be criminally relevant, several elements. First, an express, specific and firm order, addressed personally to the individual, not a generic instruction. Second, that the order be lawful, that is, issued by a competent authority or agent, within their functions and with the legal formalities; an unlawful or manifestly arbitrary order does not create a duty of obedience. Third, that the order be reiterated, so that the warning and the persistence of the refusal are on record. And finally, that the refusal be serious: a stubborn, persistent and open opposition to the action of the authority. The absence of any of these requirements means the conduct is not criminally punishable.

The Boundary with the "Gag Law"

The most relevant distinction in practice is the one separating the crime from the administrative offence. Minor disobedience to authority and lack of respect towards agents do not constitute a crime, but a serious infraction under Article 36.6 of LO 4/2015 on the Protection of Public Safety (the so-called "Gag Law"), punishable by administrative fine. The defence must challenge any artificial elevation of a mere administrative offence to the status of a crime, requiring that the conduct reach the seriousness and intensity demanded by the criminal provision. The difference is significant: the administrative route does not generate a criminal record.

Penalties under Article 556 CP

The penalty provided in Article 556.1 CP is imprisonment of three months to one year or a fine of six to eighteen months. Article 556.2 CP contemplates a lesser scenario for anyone who fails to show the respect and consideration due to authority in the exercise of their functions, punishable by a fine of one to three months. Given its minor nature, the imprisonment associated with the basic offence is eligible for suspension in first-time offenders. It should be recalled that refusing the breathalyser or drug tests required by agents is not punished under Article 556, but constitutes a specific road-safety offence under Article 383 CP, carrying imprisonment of six months to one year and disqualification from driving.

Related Public Order Offences

The offence of disobedience often appears linked to other figures within Title XXII: public disorder, illegal weapons possession, criminal organisation or group. An effective defence begins by analysing the police report, the agents' statements and any recording of the events to isolate the specific conduct and avoid disproportionate classifications.

Defence Strategy

At Alonso Sala we build the defence around the lawfulness and clarity of the order, the existence or otherwise of an express and reiterated warning, the actual seriousness of the refusal as opposed to a mere administrative infraction, the absence of intent and possible errors as to the lawfulness of the order. We examine recordings, witnesses and the proportionality of police action, and pursue, where appropriate, the reclassification of the facts to the administrative route or a dismissal.