Compensation caused by abnormal functioning of the Spanish Administration of Justice

The following was specified within the CEPEJ’s report relating to Spain in 2009, (EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE). see http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/cepej/evaluation/2010/2010_Spain.pdf

 User's right to receive compensation by the State in case of damages caused by judicial error or by abnormal functioning of the Administration of Justice is enshrined in the Spanish Constitution. To this end, citizens can claim compensation from the Ministry of Justice through an administrative procedure in which the amount will be determined.

It specified that compensation would be made available in the event of 

• excessive length of proceedings or
• non execution of court decisions

So my questions to Maria, Faro and any other lawyer on EOS is,

·        Could you please confirm if a client can claim compensation from the state in cases of damages caused by abnormal functioning of the administration of justice, and is this still enshrined in the Spanish Constitution?

·        If so, please can you explain the administrative procedure and advise what delay period (in terms of years) would be classed as “abnormal functioning”? For instance if a client has been waiting for an appeal resolution beyond three years, would this be classed as abnormal functioning?

·        Have you ever followed this compensation procedure for a client, and if so were you successful?

·        Are there limits to the amount of compensation that can be claimed?

·        How long would this procedure take and are there time limits in place to this procedure to ensure this is actually enforced?

Many thanks.

bump

Question 43) within that report

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/cepej/evaluation/2010/2010_Spain.pdf

also confirms that there is a national or local procedure for making complaints about the functioning of the judicial system (for example the treatment of a case by a judge or the duration of a proceeding).

It continues " Complaints are analysed and solved, the case being they can be referred to the Disciplinary Commission of the General Council of the Judiciary."

I'm wondering does this refer to delays of the functioning of the judicial system, or just the duration of a specific proceeding?

Have any lawyers followed through this procedure on behalf of their clients to tackle the problem of delays within the judicial system?

Is this a viable means to gain compensation for those who have been compromised by the delays?

I would be really grateful if Maria or Faro could answer these questions please.......

In the first place it has to be established and proven absolutely, without doubt, that there has been an abnormal functioning of The Administration of Justice. This happens on very few occasions. The length of time a court procedure takes does not necessarily indicate an abnormal functioning of The Administration of Justice, as there is no time limit stipulated for a procedure, it depends upon the complexity of each individual case, and there is no general rule to prove an anomaly in this situation.  The process must be taken through the Supreme Court of Justice who after taking all the facts into account decides if there has been abnormal functioning of The Administration of Justice, they will reach a verdict and decide whether or not any economic compensation is justified and in the case of a positive verdict they also decide the amount due.  

Just as an example: Recently the Supreme Court of Spain denied economic compensation to an individual suspected of being involved in the Madrid Bombing of 11/3. This individual spent 834 days in provisional prison whilst awaiting trial accused of being a member of the terrorist Cell that perpetrated the bombing. Finally he was released due to lack of evidence. When he applied for compensation the Supreme Court decided that no economic compensation was due, because, although he had been found not guilty this verdict was due to lack of evidence, which in their opinion did not justify any renumeration for the time he had already spent in prison. 

Thank you for your response DMS.

The European Commission have suggested that citizens who have submitted petitions should use the member state's "competent " system of justice.

So with this in mind may I enquire what specific statistical information is provided by Spain to the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) to ensure competency and effective judicial enforcement and where can this be reviewed?

ads

in a fair or reasonable system, I think what you are saying would be classed as common sense justice, and the only right way, however I doubt Spains government have any intention of treating those they have cheated through their own often hopeless justice system with fairness or common sense?.  Many of those cheated by the governments own lack of implementation of their own laws have seen no evidence to the contrary and I find it hard to see where change will come from?

Without some sensible  fair regulation, the judges can continue to be as crooked as they like with nobody it seems to answer to?.  What is written in Spanish law is meaningless without honesty or integrity from those we have to trust for justice.

Once again it comes down to the fact that nobody in power has the balls or intention of recognising right from wrong and taking action in favour of those so clearly and obviously wronged by the courts themselves. Those at the top often behave no better than the scum bags we win our cases against, but who's going to stop them making up their own crooked rules?, nobody it seems?.

Spanish justice is just a lottery with poor odds, and until you need it, it is probably impossible to grasp just how wrong it is, so many people continue to live is blissfull ignorance of it !.

Goodstich, this is exactly why I am looking towards the EXISTING mechanisms available to every EU citizen to try and establish what statistics are provided and more importantly reviewed by this organisation the CEPEJ (European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice).

• Are the CEPEJ not supposed to be reviewing statistics made available to them from member states on a regular basis, to identify and take action where systemic inefficiencies exist within member states' justice systems?
• Do they indeed have powers to ensure that justice is effectively and efficiently enforced, and if not, who does have that power?
• How can remedial fast tracking of these outstanding cases be effected?
• What is the purpose of data gathering if nothing transpires from the mountain of incriminating evidence?
• In the case of petition evidence to substantiate these facts how can EU budgetary controls on a member state be effected (i.e. thereby ensure that funds due to the member state are redirected to a compensation fund for the victims.)
• How can citizens follow a "competent system of justice" as directed by the European Commissioners, if the system is systemically incompetent in its administration? It's a complete catch22 scenario.

The Spanish justice system continues to compromise citizens, without any time constraints or regulatory mechanisms in place to ensure effective judicial enforcement (you are a classic case in point Goodstich).  The delays following successful case rulings result in cases sitting for indefinite periods of time, awaiting resolutions to appeals or embargoes, the consequence of which is that developers can asset strip and then declare insolvency, or go into administration in the interim years. Who then becomes responsible for this incompetence and the lack of judicial enforcement?

Please, if anyone from the legal or political fraternity has any information relating to statistical data and the CEPEJ's powers to effect a workable structure for compensation, or the means to ensure a fast track process to effect law enforcement for these victims and their outstanding cases, can they let us know.