Zapatero gets a bashing over demolitions

There is a strong movement for civil society dinamics... I do also have my hopes on these type of people´s association.

Sorry Maria I think you miunderstood my question. What I meant to say was who is responsible for paying for the court resources necessary to overcome the administrative court delays, i.e.increase in personnel, more effective communication links, etc. All remedies to effect a speedier service to cope with the massive increase in court cases as it stands right now. Is it a local, regional or national responsibility?

A common quote appears to be that the court clerks are overloaded, so how do you envisage that this can be improved without increased financial backing from the government? To many people suffering delays, it appears that they (the government ) are  failing in their duty to effect justice as things stand now through underfunding the court system.

This message was last edited by ads on 26/01/2010.

Ads:

You may find answers to your questions here:

Legal tip 159. http://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/costaluz/2400/legal-tip-159-new-money-for-justice-in-spain.aspx

Legal tip 175. http://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/costaluz/2502/legal-tip-175-new-law-speed-for-courts-in-spain.aspx

Legal tip 167. http://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/costaluz/2456/legal-tip-167-new-justice-in-spain-approved.aspx

Best regards,

Maria L. de Castro

Many thanks Maria. Looks like I have my work cut out to read learn and inwardly digest!

I might be back with a few more questions however.

Blog post today dedicated to Goodstich44. Translated from Expansion ( Financial Journal) today

Two important associations of Judges and Public Prosecutors are revising the current Criminal Code to introduce new offenses as including those who exercise political functions or positions of responsibility in Political Parties into the crime of bribery.

Associations  Jueces para la Democracia (JPD) and Unión Progresista de Fiscales (UPF) in its last annual meeting, proposed a series of measures to combat public corruption. They consider that “it is urgent to review the current Criminal Code” on crimes against public administration.

In the view of both associations, it is necessary “to refine technically the wording of existing crimes and offenses in line to introduce new forms of corruption that have emerged in recent times'.

Thus, in the conclusions document prepared by JPD and UPF, they propose to improve the traditional configuration of bribery, currently limited to those who are part of the Administration or participate in their functions some way, to ‘expressly include those exercising political functions or positions of responsibility in political parties, who hold an undoubted influence on the authorities of these parties and can determine their behavior"

Judges and prosecutors also advocate for progressive changes on prevarication. They specifically opt for 'punishing the conduct of officials of the Administration who arbitrarily issue a report or a proposed resolution against the norm', supposes cases that are right now outside the figure of prevarication.

In the field of Urban Planning crime, both associations ask for the creation of criminal offenses relating to “illegal zoning agreements signed with the sole purpose of furthering private interests”.

Therefore, and JPD UPF require the legislator  to revise the Criminal  Code as they understand that there is a 'defective fixing of wrongful conduct' which is a 'loophole for criminality ' and claim that they is leading to “impunity for serious  criminal behavior '.

Maria

www.costaluzlawyers.es

Wilting Hibiscus in Malaga (Spain) by By-Your at Flickr.com

maria

thanks very much for that.  It's so good to see the issue of corruption being taken seriously by those who can make a difference. Let's hope this revision of the Criminal Code is fully implemented, and goes far enough to stop the bad practice that has done so much damage. 

One of the biggest problems is getting your case heard in a reasonable time, so that those you are fighting are still in business at time of sentence, and you stand a chance of getting real justice rather than just being a creditor. Do you think these latest measures will improve that situation, or will some cases still be years before they are heard?  I also wonder if cases such as the Priors will be looked at retrospectively when these new criminal offences related to illegal zoning agreements are implemented?

It's certainly a move in the right direction, though only time will tell just how effective the revisions are?