1_9788491436201

65 VĂ­ctor Moreno Catena Helena Soleto MuĂąoz Directors

Anna Fiodorova Coordinator

Terrorism in Spain: a procedural approach

alternativa

TERRORISM IN SPAIN: A PROCEDURAL APPROACH

COMITÉ CIENTÍFICO DE LA EDITORIAL TIRANT LO BLANCH MARÍA JOSÉ AÑÓN ROIG

Catedrática de Filosofía del Derecho de la Universidad de Valencia

ANA CAÑIZARES LASO

Catedrática de Derecho Civil Universidad de Málaga

JORGE A. CERDIO HERRÁN

Catedrático de Teoría y Filosofía de Derecho. Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México

JOSÉ RAMÓN COSSÍO DÍAZ

Ministro de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de México

EDUARDO FERRER MAC-GREGOR POISOT

Juez de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Investigador del Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM

OWEN M. FISS

Catedrático emérito de Teoría del Derecho de la Universidad de Yale (EEUU)

JOSÉ ANTONIO GARCÍA-CRUCES GONZÁLEZ

Catedrático de Derecho Mercantil de la UNED

LUIS LÓPEZ GUERRA

Juez del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos Catedrático de Derecho Constitucional de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

ÁNGEL M. LÓPEZ Y LÓPEZ

Catedrático de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Sevilla

MARTA LORENTE SARIÑENA

Catedrática de Historia del Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

JAVIER DE LUCAS MARTÍN

Catedrático de Filosofía del Derecho y Filosofía Política de la Universidad de Valencia

VÍCTOR MORENO CATENA

Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

FRANCISCO MUÑOZ CONDE

Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla

ANGELIKA NUSSBERGER

Jueza del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos.

Catedrática de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad de Colonia (Alemania)

HÉCTOR OLASOLO ALONSO

Catedrático de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) y Presidente del Instituto Ibero-Americano de La Haya (Holanda)

LUCIANO PAREJO ALFONSO

Catedrático de Derecho Administrativo de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

TOMÁS SALA FRANCO

Catedrático de Derecho del Trabajo y de la Seguridad Social de la Universidad de Valencia

IGNACIO SANCHO GARGALLO

Magistrado de la Sala Primera (Civil) del Tribunal Supremo de España

TOMÁS S. VIVES ANTÓN

Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad de Valencia

RUTH ZIMMERLING

Catedrática de Ciencia Política de la Universidad de Mainz (Alemania)

Procedimiento de selección de originales, ver página web: www.tirant.net/index.php/editorial/procedimiento-de-seleccion-de-originales

TERRORISM IN SPAIN: a procedural approach

AUTORES Juan Alcoceba Gil Amaya Arnaiz Serrano Raquel Castillejo Manzanares Anna Fiodorova Rosa Gómez De Liaño Diego Tamara Martínez Soto Victor Moreno Catena Javier Nistal Burón Sabela Oubiña Barbolla Gonzalo Quintero Olivares Alberto Saiz Garitaonandia Raúl Sánchez Gómez Helena Soleto Muñoz Gema Varona Martínez Rocío Zafra Espinosa De Los Monteros

Valencia, 2017

Copyright ® 2017 Todos los derechos reservados. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro puede reproducirse o transmitirse por ningún procedimiento electrónico o mecánico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabación magnética, o cualquier almacenamiento de información y sistema de recuperación sin permiso escrito de los autores y del editor.

En caso de erratas y actualizaciones, la Editorial Tirant lo Blanch publicará la pertinente corrección en la página web www.tirant.com.

© VV.AA.

© TIRANT LO BLANCH EDITA: TIRANT LO BLANCH C/ Artes Gráficas, 14 - 46010 - Valencia TELFS.: 96/361 00 48 - 50 FAX: 96/369 41 51 Email:tlb@tirant.com www.tirant.com Librería virtual: www.tirant.es ISBN: 978-84-9143-620-1 MAQUETA: Innovatext

Si tiene alguna queja o sugerencia, envíenos un mail a: atencioncliente@tirant.com.

En caso de no ser atendida su sugerencia, por favor, lea en www.tirant.net/index.php/ empresa/politicas-de-empresa nuestro Procedimiento de quejas.

Responsabilidad Social Corporativa: http://www.tirant.net/Docs/RSCTirant.pdf

Index PROLOGUE................................................................................................... 15

Chapter 1 TERRORISM AS A CURRENT AND FUTURE LEGAL ISSUE 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 17 2. EVOLUTION IN SPANISH LAW........................................................ 21 3. THE SPECIFICITY OF RULES ON TERRORISM ............................ 22 4. THE ABOLITION OF LEGAL EXCEPTIONALITIES...................... 27 4.1. Exceptionalities in terrorism.................................................... 27 4.2. The potential overcoming of exceptionality........................... 29

Chapter 2 THE RIGHT TO THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, THE RIGHT TO SILENCE, THE RIGHT NOT TO INCRIMINATE ONESELF 1.

2.

3.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS.................................................................. 31 THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND ITS GUARANTIES.. 37 THE CONTENT OF THE RIGHT TO THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE........................................................................................ 42 3.1. The presumption of innocence as a treatment rule............... 45 3.2. The presumption of innocence as a trial rule......................... 54 4. THE RIGHT NOT TO INCRIMINATE ONESELF AND NOT TO COOPERATE....................................................................................... 56 5. STATEMENTS FROM THE ACCUSED AND THE RIGHT TO SILENCE.................................................................................................. 59 6. THE RIGHT TO FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE................................... 66 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 67

Chapter 3 THE FUTURE OF COUNTERTERRORISM IN SPAIN: FROM ‘SECURITY’ TO ‘DEFENCE’ 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 69 2. THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM AS AN ACT OF WAR............ 73 3. RESPONSES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.......... 78 3.1. The new counter-terrorism at the supranational level........... 78 3.2. The National Counter-Terrorism Coordination Centres....... 81 4. THE SITUATION IN SPAIN................................................................ 85 4.1. A new subjective right to security............................................. 85 4.2. A new structure for investigation............................................. 90

8

Index

4.3. A difficult fit for the legal system............................................. 92 5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................... 95 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 97

Chapter 4 The conceptualisation of ‘terrorism’ in the various United Nations instruments and their coverage in national legislation 1.

2.

3.

4.

THE CONCEPTUALISATION OF TERRORISM IN THE UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK.................................................................... 101 THE UNIVERSAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK AGAINST TERRORISM...................................................................................................... 104 2.1. Crimes related to civil aviation................................................. 105 2.2. Crimes based on the status of the victims................................ 108 CRIMES LINKED TO DANGEROUS MATERIALS........................... 109 3.1. Crimes related to ships, fixed platforms and port facilities... 112 3.2. Crimes linked to the funding of terrorism.............................. 114

BY WAY OF CONCLUSION................................................................ 117

Chapter 5 Compromise in the fight against terrorism in Spain 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 119 2. ORGANISED CRIME AND TERRORISM: AN IDENTICAL PHENOMENON?........................................................................................ 121 2.1. Characteristic features of terrorism......................................... 125 3. STATE RESPONSES TO TERRORISM............................................... 129 3.1. Procedural specificities relating to terrorism.......................... 130 3.2. Criminal specificities................................................................. 134 4. CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 136 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 137

Chapter 6 Terrorism as subject to Spanish universal jurisdiction 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 139 2. TERRORISM –IS IT INTERNATIONAL CRIME?.............................. 140 3. UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION AND CRIME OF TERRORISM......... 147 4.

SPANISH UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION FOR TERRORISM: FROM ABSOLUTE TO CONDITIONAL....................................................... 151 5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................... 166 SOURCES....................................................................................................... 167

Index

9

Chapter 7 THE ARTICULATION OF THE RIGHT TO DEFENCE IN THE ADOPTION OF PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES OF A PERSONAL NATURE IN TERRORIST OFFENCES IN THE SPANISH LEGAL SYSTEM 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 171 2.

THE IMPACT OF COUNTER-TERRORISM POLICY ON THE CRIMINAL PROCESS ............................................................................... 177 3. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE FRAMEWORK FOR GUARANTEEING CERTAIN RIGHTS IN CASES OF TERRORISM AND ARMED GROUPS....................................................................... 179 4. THE LIMITATION OF THE RIGHT TO DEFENCE BY A TRUSTED LAWYER IN PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES OF A PERSONAL NATURE ADOPTED WITH SOLITARY CONFINEMENT IN TERRORISM CASES............................................................................ 185 5. SEVERAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING ‘BALANCE’ IN THE ADVERSARIAL CRIMINAL PROCESS FOLLOWING AN ACT OF TERRORISM........................................................................................ 202 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 204

Chapter 8 CURRENT GUIDELINES ON GUARANTEES AND PREVENTIVE DETENTION IN SPAIN IN RELATION TO TERRORISM AND OTHER SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL SPECIFICITIES. WITH A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON INCOMMUNICADO DETENTION 1.

REACTIONARY TENDENCIES IN GUARANTEEISM AS A GLOBAL COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY........................................ 209 2.

COUNTER-TERRORISM LEGISLATION IN SPAIN: EXCEPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS TO THE GUARANTEES ESTABLISHED IN THE GENERAL REGIME APPLYING TO TERRORISM CASES, WITH A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON SPECIFICITIES RELATING TO POLICE CUSTODY....................................................................... 217 3. CURRENT TRENDS IN REFORMING POLICE CUSTODY. SPECIFICITIES IN TERRORISM.................................................................. 234 3.1. Specificities in detention and other proceedings in the investigation of terrorist offences in the draft Organic Law to develop fundamental rights linked to the criminal process and the 2011 draft Criminal Prosecution Act......................... 234 3.2. New developments in police custody, extensions and incommunicado detention in the draft of the 2013 Criminal Procedure Code.................................................................................. 243 4. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................... 246

10

Index

Chapter 9 Limitations of Fundamental Rights in Deprivation of Liberty in Terrorist Acts in Spain 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 249 2. PERSONAL PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES SPECIALTIES OF THE EXISTING REGULATION ON DETENTION IN TERRORISM MATTERS .................................................................................. 258 2.1. Detention in processes for terrorism....................................... 258 2.2. Solitary confinement in the eyes of CAT A brief approach... 263 3. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................... 268 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 271

Chapter 10 The deprivation of liberty in criminal trials for terrorism in Spain: from theory to practice 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 273 2. LIBERTY AND DETENTION IN THE SPANISH CRIMINAL PROCESS: EXPLORING THE CONTEXT ............................................... 278 2.1. General statistics on criminal proceedings, proceedings in terrorism cases and deprivation of liberty .............................. 278 2.2. General theoretical aspects of pre-trial detention.................. 284 a) Pre-trial detention as an exceptional precautionary measure................................................................................... 284 b) Conditions ........................................................................ 286 c) Time limits......................................................................... 292 d) Procedure.......................................................................... 294 d.1) Special reference to the pre-trial detention reform.......................................................................... 298 3. STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF PRE-TRIAL DETENTION AND TERRORISM CASES................................................................................. 299 3.1. Fieldwork: procedural issues and limitations.......................... 299 3.2. Main findings from the Pre-trial detention and Terrorism sample........................................................................................ 302 a) Some procedural data: the type of criminal process....... 302 b) The gender profile of pre-trial detainees in terrorism cases and type of terrorism .............................................. 303 c) Estimating the duration of pre-trial detention in terrorism cases in Spain............................................................ 308 c.1) Extension of pre-trial detention: possible extension of pre-trial detention in terrorism cases ........ 311 c.2) How late (or how early) are extensions of pre-trial detention for terrorism granted?........................... 312 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS................................................................. 314

Index

5.

11

APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SAMPLE....................................................................................... 316

Chapter 11 DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY IN TERRORISM CASES 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

MEASURES ESTABLISHING EXCEPTIONS IN THE PROSECUTION OF TERRORIST OFFENCES................................................... 321 LIMITING THE RIGHT TO DEFENCE............................................. 325 INCOMMUNICADO DETENTION ADOPTED BY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.............................................................................................. 327 ASSIGNING OF A COURT-APPOINTED LAWYER........................... 329 THE RIGHT TO TECHNICAL DEFENCE........................................ 334 POLICE CUSTODY AND JUDICIAL DETENTION.......................... 338 PRE-TRIAL DETENTION................................................................... 341

Chapter 12 11 March 2004 Madrid Terrorist Attacks: Legal Procedures and Trial 1.

2.

3.

4.

INTRODUCTION TO THE 11 MARCH 2004 ATTACKS................. 345 THE INQUIRY..................................................................................... 347 2.1. Procedural Peculiarities in Terrorism Cases .......................... 348 2.1.1. Procedural peculiarities............................................... 348 2.1.1.1. Communication surveillance ...................... 350 2.1.1.2. Arrest periods ............................................... 350 2.1.1.3. Solitary confinement ................................... 351 2.1.2. Competence of judicial body ...................................... 352 2.1.3. Policy of dispersal ........................................................ 353 2.1.4. Conditional release...................................................... 353 2.2. Distinctive Features of the 2004 Terrorist Attacks Investigation ............................................................................................ 354 DIFFICULTIES FACED BY THE DEFENCE ...................................... 356 3.1. Secrecy of the investigation...................................................... 357 3.2. Difficulties stemming from the different cultures and languages of the suspects in custody............................................. 359 3.3. Difficulties of the Spanish government’s custody strategy..... 360 3.4. Difficulties based on a structural imbalance in the case........ 361 3.5. Difficulties derived from the complexity of the case.............. 362 PROCEDURAL DIFFICULTIES AND IRREGULARITIES DURING THE TRIAL ......................................................................................... 363 4.1. The pressure from political and social spheres. The Mass media......................................................................................... 363 4.2. Evidence obtained in violation of human rights..................... 365

12

Index

4.3.

Irregularities in the identification procedure during the hearing ............................................................................................ 368 4.4. Other difficulties....................................................................... 370 5. LIMITATIONS TO THE APPEAL AND TO THE RIGHT TO BE CONSIDERED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY................... 370 6. FINAL ASPECTS OF THE CASE........................................................ 373 7. THE PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITIES, NOT SO IRREGULAR... 374 8. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................. 375 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 378

Chapter 13 THE TREATMENT OF TERRORISM IN SPANISH PENITENTIARY LAW 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 381 2. THE MANNER IN WHICH SENTENCES ARE SERVED BY PERSONS CONVICTED OF TERRORIST OFFENCES........................... 383 2.1. Penitentiary classification by grade in the case of terrorist prisoners.................................................................................... 383 2.2. The detention regime............................................................... 387 2.3. Allocation to a particular prison.............................................. 388 2.4. Use of prison benefit................................................................ 390 2.5. Penitentiary treatment.............................................................. 392 2.6. Security standards with terrorists in the prison environment........................................................................................... 394 3.

THE EFFECTIVE DURATION OF SENTENCES IMPOSED ON TERRORISTS. RULES FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE SENTENCE... 401 3.1. Enforcement rules for sentences served under the 1995 Criminal Code................................................................................ 403 3.2. Enforcement rules for sentences served under the 1973 Criminal Code (‘the Parot doctrine’)........................................... 406 4. JUDICIAL MONITORING OF THE ENFORCEMENT OF SENTENCES SERVED BY TERRORISTS.................................................. 410 5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................... 411

Chapter 14 RESTORATIVE PROCESSES IN THE CONTEXT OF ETA TERRORIST VICTIMISATIONS 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 413 2. STATE OF AFFAIRS IN RESTORATIVE JUSTICE FOR TERRORISM IN SPAIN.................................................................................... 415 3.

KEY ISSUES BETWEEN MACRO AND MICRO VICTIM POLICIES: AUTONOMY AND RESTORATION.................................................. 421

Index

13

4.

WHO IS CONCERNED OF WHAT? ASSUMPTIONS, MISCONCEPTIONS AND MANIPULATIONS................................................. 424 5. VICTIMS, OFFENDERS AND COMMUNITIES FACING SERIOUS CRIMES: TOWARDS A PRINCIPLE OF HUMANITY WORKING FOR ALL IN A LIMITED REASONABLE MANNER......................... 430 REFERENCES................................................................................................ 433

Chapter 15 HOW TO IMPROVE EFFECTIVENESS AT THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OF TERRORIST ACTS 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 445 2. THE DETENTION AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE................. 446 3. RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: DETENTION....................... 448 4. THE TIME FRAMES GOVERNING DETENTION............................ 449 5. AN EXCEPTIONAL EXTENSION OF DETENTION’S TIME FRAME.................................................................................................. 456 6. THE TIME FRAME OF DETENTIONS REGARDING CASES OF TERRORISM........................................................................................ 458 7. A BRIEF PROPOSAL: THE PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS................................................................................................ 460 8. THE COMPETENT JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES TO GRANT THE EXTENSION........................................................................................ 462 9. THE JUDICIAL AUTORITY’S INTERVENTION.............................. 463 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................. 465

PROLOGUE A phenomenon of terrorism is known for more than one century and has gone through different transformations, starting from anarchist assassinations of high states’ representatives at the end of the XIX century, through terrorism of nationalists and separatists and finishing with intense appearance through last two decades of jihadists’ one.

If the previous forms of terrorism have been affecting more individual or neighboring states and depending on their internal situation (like separatists of ETA or IRA), the jihadists’ terrorism has a global impact.

As reveals European Police Office only in 2016 in the European Union 142 persons died and 379 were injured in terrorist attacks.

In 2015 these numbers were respectfully 151 and 360. Some attacks were thoroughly planned and executed, other were spontaneous and difficult to trace and prevent. Additionally to direct victims, these attacks spread a threat over society, undermine its values and aim to change the way of life of the States.

Spain is one of very few states that have suffered terrorism of separatist and nationalist nature for many decades. As a consequence, the State has been creating and improving a package of counter terrorism measures, including prevention, establishment of relevant units, information exchange tools and procedural peculiarities in the process. Being unfortunate by its origin, this Spanish experience has served as a solid background to develop tools against new terrorism threats in other countries and organizations.

This book presents a comprehensive picture of Spanish experience in fighting against terrorism with a special focus on the criminal investigation, its particularities and differences from investigation of other crimes and reflects the newest legislative changes in this respect, approved in 2015, and it is a result of

16

Prologue

the research project “Las privaciones de libertad en los procesos por terrorismo” founded by the Ministerio de ciencia e innovación, DER2008-06178 and directed by Victor Moreno Catena.

Madrid, July 2017 The directors, Víctor Moreno Catena and Helena Soleto

Chapter 1

TERRORISM AS A CURRENT AND FUTURE LEGAL ISSUE Gonzalo Quintero Olivares Professor of Criminal Law Universidad Rovira i Virgili/Pública de Tarragona (Spain)

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction. 2. Evolution in Spanish law. 3. The specificity of rules on terrorism.

4. The abolition of legal exceptionalities. 4.1. Exceptionalities in terrorism. 4.2. The potential overcoming of exceptionality.

1. INTRODUCTION The issue of terrorism is one of the greatest tragedies of our time. It is both a criminal matter and the source of conflicts –real or sectarian, explainable or the fruit of all kinds of fanaticism– simmering in many societies. The fight against terrorism tests the moral integrity of societies and the solidarity between states.

The aim here is not to discuss the catastrophes lurking in this new 21st century, nor to analyse particularly the terrorist manifestation of the frustrations of certain sectors of the population of Muslim states. This will be the issue of the century, and I believe that the formulas and decisions developed from the late 19th century to the end of the 20th century in relation to the fight against terrorism will no longer be valid in tackling it. It is a new, dramatic problem.

To state that ‘European terrorism’, ranging from the anarchism of the late 19th century1 to nationalist terrorisms of different kinds,

1

Following the failure of the Paris Commune anarchist government, anarchism abandoned a substantial part of its ‘intellectual’ nature and moved onto direct action against political and economic leaders, as well as against the ‘hated’

18

Gonzalo Quintero Olivares

whether Basque or Irish, and including the far right and far left terrorism suffered by countries like Italy, is something different may appear to be an absurd assessment, but in my view, anyone taking the contrary viewpoint and assuming that this is a phenomenon of different origin but equal effects is committing a serious error in perspective and legal response.

I will concentrate primarily here upon Spain, a nation tortured by terrorism. One prior warning must be made: We already know that terrorism has not ceased with the provisional end of ETA, as unfortunately there are and will continue to be other terrorist phenomena around the world, and we do not know when they will rear their heads in Spain, but what we do know is that the ghastliest crime in our history (the Atocha massacre) was the work of a ‘new’ terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism.

In these circumstances, it is clear that anti-terrorism policy must be based on an assessment of what is currently the most dangerous terrorist hub, without a doubt Islamic terrorism, which continues to grow alongside the frustration and desperation of large population masses in these states.

upper class in the places where the latter gathered. This was the road to destroying ‘Power’, and a terrible series of crimes marked the years between the end of the 19th century and the 20th century. Some of the most prominent were: the assassination of Tsar Alexander II in March 1881, the frustrated attempts on the life of Kaiser Wilhelm I in 1878 and 1884, the Paris bombings (Café Terminus and Restaurant Foyot) in 1894, the assassination in Lyon of the President of France, François Sadi Carnot in 1894, the assassination of Empress Elisabeth Wittelsbach of Austria in Geneva in 1898, the assassination of Umberto I of Italy in Monza in July 1900, the assassination of William McKinley, president of the United States of North America in 1901, the assassination of King Carlos I of Portugal in 1908, theassassination of King George I of Greece in March 1913.

In Spain specifically, four heads of government were assassinated by anarchists: Prim (1870), Cánovas (1897), Canalejas (1912) and Dato (1921). To this list of assassinations, we may add the thwarted attack on King Alfonso XII in Madrid in October 1878, the bombing of the Liceu Opera in Barcelona on 7th November 1893, resulting in twenty deaths, and the failed attempt on the lives of Alfonso XIII of Spain and his wife Victoria Eugenia in 1906.

Terrorism as a current and future legal issue

19

To this day, in a concealed manner, many Islamic states have allowed the desperation of their citizens to take the path of blaming the West and the ‘demon infidel’. In this way, they have succeeded in calming domestic tensions. However, the efficacy of this course of action (of which Libya was a perfect example) appears to be waning, and it is impossible to know today what the future holds, once it has been demonstrated that the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ has sidelined Al Qaeda and their anti-Western agenda, pushing inherent structural problems into public view. Nonetheless, the fight against the Great Satan, embodied by Western states, will not cease to exist.

It is easy to predict that there will continue to be Islamic terrorism in the future. What its lifespan would be if the states in which it originates marginalised the ideologues and religious fanatics who advocate violence against the West as a solution is something that only time will tell, but which for now has yet to materialise2.

While the situation develops, we must remember that terrorism, besides being a horrendous crime and a human tragedy for hundreds of people, is also a legal issue. This gives rise to the assertion that Spanish terrorism (principally that of ETA) has been a determining factor in criminal, procedural and penitentiary legislative policy. On this basis, it is far from absurd to suggest that the expected disappearance of ETA should prompt revision of the policy which has until now been followed in the legal area.

This policy has been characterised by the presumption of exceptionality, which has resulted in regulatory alterations to the legislation. For many 2

To be sure, cultural anthropologists have broad scope for studying the strength of Islam in many nations, extending into the public and private lives of their inhabitants. This is incomprehensible to proponents of the secularism which dominates in the Western world, but herein lies part of the basis of the problem, along with the frustration generated by the evolution of history, with the exception of certain oil-rich states. Whether or not the so-called ‘leap into modernity’ has been impeded by the religion is a related but different topic, and not one which I am able to analyse here.

20

Gonzalo Quintero Olivares

observers, the fight against terrorism is primarily a police matter, in the broadest sense (international cooperation, information, investigation, etc.). Secondly, judicial cooperation is of course fundamental, as is the solidarity between states which has existed in Europe, although there was some delay in establishing a common definition of terrorism3, and that definition continues to be the subject of much discussion.

However, it is more difficult to reach agreements with regard to other terrorist phenomena, as in the case of Islamic terrorism, where cooperation and solidarity are much more difficult, due in part to the different perspectives on the issue in the West and in the Islamic world, whether in Iran or Saudi Arabia4.

I will not discuss the interesting yet complicated issue of the international legal definition of the concepts of political crime and terrorist crime, as this is not my aim here5, and it is sufficient to reiterate the ‘functionality’ of these concepts depending upon 3

4

5

Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on combating terrorism. On this decision, see N .García Rivas La tipificación “europea” del delito terrorista en la Decisión Marco de 2002: análisis y perspectiva, Revista General de Derecho Penal, Nº. 4, 2005.

Some years ago, in a brilliant commentary on the ‘extra-European’ perspective on the issue, R. Toscano pointed out that the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) not only denied that any act committed by the various Palestinian movements could be considered terrorism, but even declared that it could not reach agreement on whether to describe suicide bombers or kamikazes as terrorists or as ‘freedom fighters’. That did not stop the Organisation from describing terrorism as “...any act of violence or threat thereof notwithstanding its motives or intentions perpetrated to carry out an individual or collective criminal plan with the aim of terrorising people or threatening to harm them or imperilling their lives, honour, freedoms, security or rights...”. Yet this broad description is immediately cancelled out by the clause that “People’s struggle including armed struggle against foreign occupation, aggression, colonialism, and hegemony, aimed at liberation and self-determination in accordance with the principles of international law shall not be considered a terrorist crime.”

I addressed this topic in La revisión del delito político, la nueva concepción del terrorismo y la satanización del islamismo, in the jointly-edited book “Derecho penal del enemigo. El discurso penal de la exclusión”, edited by Cancio Meliá and Gómez Jara, Edisofer, Buenos Aires / Madrid, 2006, as well as in La nuova imagine del reato politico e il terrorismo “islamista”, in “Delitto Politico