“Prevaricación” in Spanish is usually
translated as “Obstruction of justice”, however that
is broader than what we are discussing in this web site. The type
of “Obstruction of justice” we are discussing is when
a judge dictates an unjust sentence or resolution, either on
purpose or by negligence. This is punished severely under Spanish
law, and the prescription period is ten or twenty years. This
means that if the current government doesn't have the courage to
act against some judges who obstruct justice, the next government
might, or the next one, or the next one. A judge could end up with
a disgraced retirement, like Juan
Poch, or in jail, like Luis
With all these negatives associated with obstruction of
justice, it is surprising that a judge would think to do it. But
due to the current lack of
judicial discipline, the pervasive opinion is that nothing
will happen to the transgressors anyway.
This isn't to say that everything bad which a judge can do is
obstruction of justice. Legitimate errors do occur, and the law
has provisions for correcting them when they do. This normally
happens in a correct and transparent manner.
What type of resolution is obstruction of justice? It is a
resolution so flagrantly illegal that it shows its lack of
rationality and shows its arbitrariness.
According to the law, ALL judicial resolutions must be
rationalized. This means that judges have to explain how they
arrived at their decisions, how they evaluated the evidence, which
articles in the law were applied, etc, in the resolutions.
When a judge doesn't explain a resolution, the resolution shows
its arbitrariness. When also the resolution is flagrantly illegal,
it constitutes the conditions in the law and in the jurisprudence
for obstruction of justice.
You can find many examples of arbitrary and flagrantly illegal
resolutions in this web site.