The Constitutional ruling on the state of alarm would annul the fines for breaching the confinement

During the first state of alarm, more than a million fines were imposed, part of which for violating the movement restriction

Control of the Civil Guard during the state of alarm, in October 2020.ALBERTO DI LOLLI

The nullity of the home confinement that the Constitutional Court is studying will mean leaving without legal support the fines imposed for contravening that measure, which will therefore be annulled. The nullity will affect the procedures that are still underway, but not those that have already been definitively closed. Among those canceled will be all those that have not yet been paid. Among those that are not, those already paid in which the claim period has already passed.

During the first state of alarm, more than a million fines were imposed, part of which were for breaching the movement restriction. The most common sanction was the minimum for disobedience, of 601 euros. In reality, those fines have already been overturned numerous times. Part of the judges to whom the appeals reached have considered that the sanctions provided in the law could not be applied to breaches of confinement. Citizen Security Law, as proposes Interior.

Sometimes the Constitutional Court includes in its sentences declaring some nullity that the decision does not have retroactive effects. It happens in cases where the economic significance of the decision advises it. This will not be the case, according to legal sources.

In the Vox appeal it was also considered that the article of the royal decree of the state of alarm that limited economic activity should be annulled. The presentation that the magistrate Pedro Gonzlez-Trevijano take it to plenary in two weeks rejects it. It considers that in this area the limitations were not so strict as to consider that it was a suspension of rights, and not just a limitation.

READ ALSO:  Could Donald Trump go to prison before the new criminal investigation of his companies?

The opposite would have required, as the paper for home confinement maintains, the declaration of a state of exception. The nullity of this limitation would have opened the door to demand financial responsibilities from the Administration that could have reached exorbitant figures.

(function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(d.getElementById(id))return;js=d.createElement(s);;js.src=””;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}(document,’script’,’facebook-jssdk’)); .

Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *