Criminal Lawyers in Electoral Crimes

Criminal Defense in Electoral Crimes

Electoral crimes are criminal offenses established in Spain's Organic Law on General Electoral Regime (LOREG, Arts. 139-150) protecting the integrity of the democratic process and the free exercise of active and passive suffrage (Art. 23 Spanish Constitution). The protected legal interest is twofold: the purity of the electoral process as a pillar of the rule of law, and the individual freedom of the elector to form and cast their vote without pressure. Supreme Court case-law requires specific intent to alter the result or impede voting rights, ruling out mere administrative irregularities or procedural errors lacking material relevance.

The typified conducts are diverse and exhaustively listed. Census falsification (Art. 140 LOREG) sanctions the undue inclusion or exclusion of voters. Record or ballot falsification (Art. 141 LOREG) punishes material manipulation of process documents. Vote buying (Art. 146.1 LOREG) reaches both the offeror and recipient of gifts in exchange for the vote or abstention. Electoral coercion (Art. 146.1.a LOREG) typifies threats or violence to condition the vote. Violation of vote secrecy (Art. 146.1.b LOREG) protects ballot confidentiality. And illegal propaganda during reflection day (Art. 144.2 LOREG) closes the catalogue, today with renewed relevance due to massive social media use the day before voting.

The penalties are graded by severity. Census falsification carries 6 months to 2 years' prison and special disqualification. Record falsification rises to 1 to 4 years' prison with absolute disqualification. Vote buying is punished with 6 months to 3 years' prison and fine. Electoral coercion with violence can reach up to 4 years' prison. When the perpetrators are authorities, officials or polling-station members, Art. 137 LOREG applies specific aggravation with absolute disqualification of 6 to 10 years. Accessory penalties —loss of passive suffrage rights, disqualification from public office, proportional fines— usually have greater consequences in political practice than the prison sentence itself.

Technical defense in electoral crimes is articulated on four axes. First, atypicality due to absence of specific intent: LOREG requires direct intention to alter the process, excluding administrative errors, regulatory confusion or negligent conduct from the criminal sphere. Second, strict typicity: LOREG describes very concrete conducts and analogy in malam partem is forbidden (Art. 4.1 CP); many electoral irregularities are administrative infractions, not crimes. Third, statute of limitations: most types expire after 5 years, counted from consummation, which in overlapping electoral periods becomes decisive. Fourth, the constitutional assessment of the penalty: the principle of proportionality and the impact on the fundamental right to passive suffrage (Art. 23 Spanish Constitution) compel restrictive interpretation of disqualification penalties, in line with Constitutional Court doctrine.

In current forensic practice, electoral proceedings present crucial particularities: investigation can be concentrated within extremely short deadlines after the proclamation of elected officials; the Central Electoral Board and provincial boards have legal obligation to refer any criminal indicia to the Public Prosecutor; and the jurisdictional privileges of elected officials determine specific competences (TSJ, Supreme Court). At Alonso Sala, our criminal lawyers specialized in electoral offenses intervene with the urgency the process demands: expert reports in electoral statistics to challenge census irregularities, analysis of documentary chain of custody, defense of good faith in procedural errors, and construction of strategies before electoral boards and courts. We treat each case aware that at stake is not only the defendant's liberty, but the future exercise of their right to passive suffrage and, where applicable, the preservation of the electoral seat obtained.