Jury: Fundamental right to defense and presumption of innocence
Currently, the importance and great role occupied by the media in our lives are evident. So these are the main technical systems for which the news as a whole is up to date. Either through television, radio or even social networks.
In my view, unfortunately on many occasions it happens that the media do not have the concrete or rather information do not have enough knowledge to inform and be able to discuss the matter in question. In the same way, there is the case in which there are a series of chains and especially in the case of television in which they transmit the information impartially and can be politicized and unlike how it should really be, more subjectively than objective. This can create erroneous news, the famous "fake news", which after all come to the hands of each and every citizens. In addition, apart from the aforementioned in terms of deceptive data, the media pressure born in many situations can also harm the legality and legality of the final sentence. Linked to this, it is worth mentioning that the Mass Media is the one that after all results in public opinion. In addition, it is noteworthy that most cases in which they focus are related to violence and their respective convictions, since they tend to create a greater attraction at the audience.
However, it is true that on the one hand the fact that the media make special emphasis on the crimes produced in our country can have positive aspects since it allows to transmit to society the problems that occur and thus strengthen consciousnessSocial. On the other hand, retaking what is previously expressed, these means of information generally tend to disseminate distorted information and especially to exaggerate the severity of the matter. They can even build an image away from reality.
In conclusion, in my opinion such an excess of information but especially distorted, and according to the social concern that this can lead to, I consider that they can influence the conviction since they are seen in obligation and with the pressure of reacting with immediacy with immediacy. Similarly, on numerous occasions the media show the different consequences they would entail based on the different decisions taken, therefore, that could also affect the resolution.
To what extent would the fundamental right to defense and the presumption of innocence be affected? We must start that the right to defense and the presumption of innocence are two of the fundamental rights included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, expressly in articles 10 and 11. As stated textually, “every person has the right, under conditions of full equality, to be heard publicly and with justice by an independent and impartial court, for the determination of their rights and obligations or for the examination of any accusation against itin criminal matters."And" every person accused of crime has the right to presume his innocence as long as his guilt is not proven, in accordance with the law and in public trial in which all the necessary guarantees for his defense have been assured.”The right to defense is equally recognized in the Spanish Constitution in article 24,“ all persons have the right to obtain the effective protection of judges and courts in the exercise of their legitimate rights and interests, without, in any case, helplessness can occur.”To this extent I consider that its special importance is evident.
That said, as I have stressed in the previous issue, the media pressure that can be created and especially because the media tend to make impetus in the seriousness of the fact and in which according to the opinion of societyIt is the criminal, these rights can be affected.
Similarly, these means can form a kind of "parallel judgments" and judge or accuse the subject who is considered a criminal for society, so that the right to honor would be violated and violate the right to the presumption of innocence and derivein being publicly convicted, which possibly harms the following sentences. In addition, the image that is created from the accused for what the media shows will have a lot to do with the opinion of the case since the whole of society tends to be guided by what they report.
In relation to this, the example of the Juan Guerra case should be highlighted. This case was based on the fact that they accused Juan Guerra, brother of the vice president of the Spanish government of that time, Alfonso Guerra, of corruption. Juan Guerra was one of those who requested among other things his right to the presumption of innocence for the continuous attacks he was suffering in the media attacking his right to honor since they considered him guilty of crimes. We can also highlight the case of Dolores Vázquez, one of the greatest mistakes made in Spain, who was unfairly condemned as guilty of the murder of Rocío Wanninkhof at 15 years and one day in prison and 18 million pesetas. In this aspect, perhaps had a lot to do with the information transmitted by the media, which declared it guilty and that after all are those that give rise to public opinion, which can also influence justice in justice.
Many of these cases are prosecuted before a jury, do you think this fact can affect the conviction and presumption of innocence?
The jury, under article 125 of the Spanish Constitution, it is stated that “citizens may exercise popular action and participate in the administration of justice through the jury institution, in the form and with respect to those criminal proceedings that the law that the lawDetermine, as well as in customary and traditional courts."That is, it is a collegiate body composed of citizens formed in specific cases to make a certain decision. The requirements that the members must meet are: to be Spanish of legal age, to be in the full exercise of their political rights, know how to read and write, be a neighbor at the time of the designation of any municipality in which the crime is committed, andfinally not being physical, psychically or sensory prevented.
Unlike the judges that would be the other institution by which a decision could be reached, they require different requirements and in my most necessary point of view. These in addition to the requirements that the jury requires, are a law degree and pass a free opposition divided into three phases. The approved ones will be registered in the School of Judicial Practice, that is, as Judges in Practices. I consider that these requirements are much more demanding.
That said, in my view the fact that it is the jury who decides the conviction can affect both the conviction and the presumption of innocence since if we observe the requirements that I have mentioned, especially the fact that they lack trainingand specialized degree in the case I consider that it makes them easily manipulable. In the same way, in my opinion the members of the jury will be guided much more by the beliefs, feelings and manifestations of society.
Knowing the jury’s institution, do you think it is a valid institution in society for the prosecution of certain crimes? Only for some? Or, on the contrary, do you understand that everything must be known by a technical judge? Impartiality is guaranteed as regulated.
Out of own, I consider that although the possibility of acting by citizens in certain judgments through the jury is recognized in the Constitution, I consider that the requirements required to be part of it are insufficient for crimes of such importance, such asThis is the case of homicides or cases of gender violence, which could lead to unfair sentences. That said, in my opinion all cases should be known by the judges. Now, I also do not consider that the jury figure has to totally disappear, since many of the complaints that are currently produced are due to the little participation of citizenship in court. This is why perhaps what I am most fair is the institution of a mixed jury also called scabin, composed of judges and citizens.
Likewise, the cases that are known by the jury are those related to criminal law, which in my opinion more delicacy and training require, since their consequences can be painful for the corresponding victims, if we highlight cases such as gender violence, threats threats, omission of the duty of relief, purple raid or on the other hand, the cases of influence peddling or bribery. In my view and if it was given the case that my person was affected, under any doubt I would opt for someone with training on the matter to be carried out.
I found it interesting what was indicated in an article published in "Today", a newspaper by Badajoz in which I pointed out that procedural law experts highlight the word "may" of article 25 that in the previous issue I have exposed. With this, they allude to the fact that the creation of this institution is not mandatory, which under my view shows that it is not a completely essential institution. In addition, it should be noted that the jury institution does not have great support in our country, because in many occasions it has resulted in erroneous resolutions and often invading the right to the presumption of innocence for being carried away by the majority opinion of society. Which does not have to be adequate.
One of the best known cases for which it has been stated that the popular jury carried out was the case of Miguel López, accused of killing with two shots to his mother -in -law for which he considered himself innocent since it was considered that the crime was consummatedFor a stranger. It was also determined that he did not commit the crime of illegal possession of arms. Likewise, many of the best known cases occurred in our country as the matter of Asunta Basterra or the Diana Quer case. Referring to the case of Diana Quer, in which Enrique Abuín was judged for crimes of homicide or murder, illegal detention and crime against sexual freedom. In my view, I consider that a issue of such gravity should not be known by a jury and especially by the basic requirements that are required.