Criminal Lawyers in Pollution Crimes

Since Organic Law 1/2015, the basic pollution offence (Art. 325.1 CP) requires that the spill or emission causes or may cause "substantial damage" to the quality of air, soil or water, or to animals or plants; the capacity to "seriously prejudice" the balance of natural systems belongs to the aggravated form (Art. 325.2). Our defence is based on expert reports that discuss this potential severity and question the causal link.

Concept (Art. 325 CP)

The offence against natural resources and the environment under Art. 325 CP protects the balance of natural systems and, mediately, human health. It is a blank criminal law: it requires the contravention of laws or other general provisions protecting the environment. It is configured as a danger offence: it does not require the production of actual damage, but that the conduct may cause substantial damage to the quality of air, soil or water, or to animals or plants (and, in the aggravated form of Art. 325.2, seriously prejudice the balance of natural systems). This danger nature and the reference to environmental regulations are the key interpretive elements of the offence.

Forms (Arts. 325-328 CP)

The typical conducts are varied: emissions, discharges, radiation, extractions or excavations, landfills, noise, vibrations, injections or deposits into the atmosphere, the soil, the subsoil or terrestrial, maritime or underground waters. Acoustic pollution (noise) may integrate the offence when it reaches an intensity capable of causing substantial damage or a serious risk to human health. Alongside Art. 325, Art. 326 CP criminalises illegal waste management and Art. 327 CP sets out the aggravating factors (clandestinity, disobedience to correction orders, falsification of information, obstruction of inspection, risk of irreversible deterioration), with the penalty raised by one degree.

Penalties (Arts. 325-331 CP)

The penalties are graduated by seriousness. The basic type of Art. 325.1 CP carries 6 months to 2 years' prison, a fine of 10 to 14 months and special disqualification of 1 to 2 years. When the conduct may seriously prejudice the balance of natural systems (Art. 325.2), the penalty rises to 2 to 5 years' prison; if it also generates serious risk to human health, it is imposed in its upper half and may reach the next degree up. Commission by gross negligence is punished with the penalty lowered by one degree (Art. 331 CP). Legal entities are liable under Art. 328 CP, with fines and disqualifications.

Defence Strategy

The defence is eminently expert-based. First, the discussion of potential seriousness: since the offence requires the capacity to cause substantial damage, environmental expert evidence proving the minor entity of the discharge or emission may exclude criminal typicity and redirect the facts to administrative sanction. Second, the causal relationship: in areas with multiple polluting sources, attributing the risk to a specific emitter requires rigorous proof. Third, compliance with administrative authorisations and limits: acting within authorised values weakens the contravention of the extra-criminal rule required by the blank criminal law. Fourth, delegation of functions and due diligence in the corporate sphere.

Current Forensic Practice

In forensic practice, pollution proceedings concentrate on industrial and agricultural discharges, illegal waste management, atmospheric emissions and acoustic pollution from leisure activities. The investigation is usually supported by the Civil Guard's SEPRONA and the Environmental Prosecutor's Offices, with growing prominence of the criminal liability of legal entities and their administrators. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency and European and national environmental regulations configure the framework. At Alonso Sala, with 15+ years' experience, we articulate a defence with environmental experts, challenging potential seriousness, causation and the administrative cover of the activity.