Criminal Lawyers in Public & Official Documents

The offence of public or official document forgery committed by individuals, regulated in Art. 392 in relation to Art. 390 of the Spanish Criminal Code, protects public faith understood as collective trust in the veracity of documents emanating from public officers (notaries, court clerks) or from the Administration (ID, passport, vehicle plates, administrative certifications, official medical prescriptions). The punitive regime is the most severe within the document-forgery category because these instruments constitute full proof before third parties and the State itself. Consolidated Supreme Court case-law has precisified the contours of the type distinguishing between material forgery (alteration of essential elements) and ideological forgery (untruthfulness in the narration of facts), with a differentiated regime according to whether the perpetrator is an authority, official or individual. As criminal lawyers specialising in document forgery, we articulate strategic defence from the first procedural step.

The typical modalities under Art. 390 CP, applicable to individuals through Art. 392 CP, are exhaustively listed. The material alteration of essential elements (dates, amounts, identifying data, photographs, stamps). The simulation of a public or official document entirely manufactured as authentic (false ID, forged passport, non-existent administrative certification). The attribution of intervention to persons who have not partaken (simulating the notary's signature, the registrar's signature, the ID holder's signature). In contrast, ideological forgery committed by individuals —lying about the facts contained in the document without materially altering its medium— is, as a rule, unpunished, except for special duty of veracity cases. The most recurring cases are forged IDs and passports, altered vehicle plates to evade fines, false medical prescriptions to obtain controlled substances, photocopied disabled-parking cards and simulated public deeds.

The penalties are severe. For the individual who forges a public, official or commercial document (Art. 392 CP): prison from 6 months to 3 years and fine of 6 to 12 months. For the authority or public official who commits forgery in the exercise of their functions (Art. 390 CP): prison from 3 to 6 years, fine of 6 to 24 months and special disqualification from public employment of 2 to 6 years. When the forgery is instrumentally used to commit other offences (procedural fraud under Art. 250.1.7 CP, tax defraudation under Art. 305 CP, corporate offence under Art. 290 CP, money laundering under Art. 301 CP), real or instrumental concurrence proceeds with notable aggravation of the criminal response. The criminal liability of the legal entity (Art. 31 bis CP) may be activated against instrumental companies, with substantial fines and disqualification from public contracting.

The technical defence articulates several complementary lines. First, the atypicality of ideological forgery: the client who merely lied to the notary about the real price, the nature of a donation or the destination of the financial product remains outside the criminal type except for special duty of veracity. Second, crude or innocuous forgery: manifestly gross imitations, without real capacity to deceive the average recipient, are atypical according to settled case-law. Third, the typical reconduction from official document to certificate or private document: if we manage to certify that the questioned document does not accredit a substantive right or emanate from a public officer with full certifying power, the qualification shifts to the much more lenient regime of Arts. 395 or 397 CP, with fine penalty. Fourth, handwriting and documentoscopic expertise to challenge material authorship. Fifth, mistake of prohibition on the official nature of the document used.

In current forensic practice we observe sustained growth in public and official document forgery proceedings, especially linked to forged IDs and passports in foreigner-status contexts, altered vehicle plates with tape or paint, false medical prescriptions to obtain fentanyl, oxycodone or benzodiazepines, photocopied disabled-parking cards and simulated public deeds in real-estate and succession operations. EU Regulation eIDAS2 (2024/1183) on European digital identity, Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, Act 39/2015 on Common Administrative Procedure and recent Supreme Court case-law on document forgery have transformed the evidentiary framework. At Alonso Sala, we tackle each file with certified handwriting, documentoscopic and forensic computer experts, articulate aggressive procedural strategy and build solid technical defence that neutralises or substantially modulates the charge.