OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Asociación de Víctimas de corrupción judicial

AVJC

Investigación y seguimiento de la corrupción y malas prácticas en la Administración de Justicia en España.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Amendment of the EU rules on victims’ rights

15 Dec 2021

Victims of crime are still not protected against those who break the law and those who commit crimes against us. (1) Firstly, the Directive's own definition of victim, as set out in Article 2.1.a), is not respected. In order to avoid providing protection for the victim, the courts, which must rule on the protection of the victim, first hide behind the fact that it must be demonstrated in the course of the proceedings that are beginning that the harm actually occurred and then, in most cases, deny the facts that are provided as evidence or modify or reduce them, so that at the end of the proceedings, and only at the end, they justify not having provided any assistance to the victim. This renders the rest of the Directive completely useless. (2) The supports set out in Article 1.1 of the Directive are reduced to treating victims "in a respectful and sensitive, individualized, professional and non-discriminatory manner". The rest of the Directive is only content that comes to detail in a very generic way without providing any added value in the needs of those who are being victims of crime. Article 9, which attempts to be a little more specific, continues to remain in generalities. The entire Chapter 3 is a reiteration from Art. 47 of the Charter. (3) As far as compensation rights are concerned, the Directive does not provide for what is, however, provided for in international law, to which all or almost all Member States have subscribed. Article 14 of the Directive provides for a right to reimbursement of expenses and Article 15 for a right to restitution of property, always "following a decision by a competent authority" and in accordance with "national law". Something that normally does not allow victims any restitution in practice. But, as we said, this does not include what is included in international law: The Principle of Restitutio ad integrum under international law calls for redress to victims of serious human rights and humanitarian law violations. This justifies the need for rehabilitation as a form of reparation, since victims have a right to reconstruct, as far as possible, their lives (https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4c46c5972.pdf ). The term “redress” encompasses the concepts of “effective remedy” and “reparation”. The comprehensive reparative concept therefore entails restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition and refers to the full scope of measures required to redress violations (United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, General Comment No. 3 of the Committee against Torture (2012)) including access to justice. (4) The judicial procedures to obtain reimbursement and compensation are designed in such a way that it is practically impossible to achieve it. Because of the deadlines established to be able to request it, because of the high technical qualification required of those who must be hired by the victims to request it - something to which the victims, in most cases, do not have access since they have been left in very precarious situations - and because of the long periods of time that the jurisdictional bodies take to reach a definitive decision. A victim can spend years, even more than ten years, trying to recover what the crime took from him. This makes it almost impossible, in practice, to make it real. (5) MS's should consider setting up dedicated funds and mechanisms to provide timely compensation to victims of crime, so that victims do not have to wait until lengthy civil or criminal proceedings are concluded. Civil liability should be available independently of the criminal proceeding and necessary legislation and institutions for such purposes should be in place. If criminal proceedings are required by domestic legislation to take place before civil compensation can be sought, then the absence or undue delay of those criminal proceedings constitute a failure on behalf of the MS
Read full response

Response to 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard

6 Dec 2021

As stated in your summary, effective justice systems are essential for implementing EU law and for upholding the rule of law and the values upon which the EU is founded. But, from our perspective, the EU Justice Scoreboard is seriously lacking in terms of the information it collects. The overview is focused on indicators of (1) efficiency (2) quality and (3) independence. It leaves aside the examination of impartiality by courts and judicial systems. One of the core elements in the review of the application of the rule of law mechanism. Impartiality, in 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard, was only considered in a formal way. As part of internal independence (point 3.3.b) and defined as an equal distance maintained from the parties to the proceedings and their respective interest, with regard to the subject matter of those proceedings. There was nothing on the previous scoreboard in connection with compliance with EU Law by courts. Also, almost nothing in connection with the definition of the principle of rule of law. We believe examination on impartiality is essential if the application of EU law and the principle of the rule of law are to be assessed. As it was stated in 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard: 1) Efficiency is evaluated in terms of creditors more likely to lend, businesses dissuaded from opportunistic behaviors, reduction of transaction costs, innovative businesses more likely to invest and reducing the length of court proceedings. 2) Quality is evaluated into four categories: accessibility of justice for citizens and businesses; adequate financial and human resources; putting in place assessments tools and digitalization. Not even one question about the quality of the rulings and about the level of satisfaction of the European citizens in terms of respect and application of the principle of rule of law. Rule of law is defined by art. 2 of EU Regulation 2020/2092 as referred to the Union value enshrined in Article 2 TEU, that includes the principles of legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic law-making process; legal certainty; prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers; effective judicial protection, including access to justice, by independent and impartial courts, also as regards fundamental rights; separation of powers; and non-discrimination and equality before the law. Previous Scoreboards were only focused in asking about access to justice (legal aid, court fees, legal fees, child-friendly justice, financial resources, human resources, training, assessment tools and digitalization) and independent courts (perceived judicial independence, structural independence, safeguards relating to the functioning of national prosecution services in the EU, independence of Bars and lawyers in the EU). There were no questions about: (1) The principle of legality in terms of (a) transparency (b) accountable justice (c) democratic and pluralistic law-making (2) Legal certainty (3) Prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers (4) Prohibition of arbitrariness of the judicial powers (5) Effective judicial protection by impartial courts (previously only independence has been asked and access to justice) (6) Effective judicial protection as regards of fundamental rights (7) Non-discrimination and equality before the law If the purpose of the Justice Scoreboard is to improve the effectiveness of the national justice in MS systems, we consider it essential to include the previously mentioned points in future scoreboards. All of them are an essential part of the rule of law principle and a way of confirming its application among Member States. The inclusion of these points is, at the same time, a way to know - in a real way -the opinion of the citizens of the European Union about the real effectiveness of Justice.
Read full response

Response to EU action against abusive litigation targeting journalists and rights defenders

5 Oct 2021

In Spain, the practice of bringing legal proceedings against complainants of violations of EU law is widespread. Complaints are always made and always include violations of Human Rights. Fear is pursued among the population. The fear to denounce. And public scorn is made of everything that happens to whistleblowers when they denounce and dare to confront corruption. It is systematic and widespread in the Kingdom of Spain. These types of practices continue to be applied, regardless of the fact that EU Directive 2019/1937, which prohibits these practices and qualifies them as retaliation, has been in force for almost two years. Retaliation which, in turn, is prohibited by EU law. Those who do so do not care about EU law. They violate it with impunity. So far they know, from experience, that neither the EU Commission, nor the EU Parliament, nor the Court of Justice of the Union has launched effective, impartial and diligent investigations to eradicate the frontal contempt for the law of the Union. The apex of this type of practices in the Kingdom of Spain is in the Administration of Justice. Systematically certain Judges and Prosecutors act against complainants, allowing proceedings that are clear reprisals and issuing sentences contrary to EU law. Sentences that include imprisonment - in order to silence the whistleblower and send a clear intimidating message to society about what happens to whistleblowers - and in most cases financial ruin. For loss of employment, for fines and for actions contrary to the Law that are allowed in the Courts in order to deprive the whistleblower of economic means. Always in violation of Union Law. It works as a criminal organization. It is systematic and floods many parts of the Administration of Justice. On the one hand, the denounced feel protected. On the other hand, those who, in defense of the denounced - the corrupt -, execute the actions against the victim - the denouncer -, feel unpunished. Nothing happens to them. Every day that passes they feel more empowered. Some Judges in the Administration of Justice act like the sheriffs of the American Old West. They do not care about the Law and the Law of the Union. For them "The Law is me". And it is more and more public and more evident. Not only in Spain. Even the ECHR has recently issued a judgment highlighting that the Supreme Court of the Kingdom of Spain may be violating legal certainty and "undermining public confidence in the Judiciary" (App No. 79530/17, September 14th, 2021). When the person who carries out a fraud sees that there are no legal consequences for him or her and that, nevertheless, there are legal consequences for the person who denounces him or her, corruption grows like foam. That is why the Adm of Justice is the vertex. In Spain it is institutionalized among State agencies and among certain political and business organizations. As long as effective, impartial and diligent investigations are not carried out into what is happening in the Administration of Justice and as long as those judges and prosecutors who act against the law of the Union continue to feel unpunished, are not sanctioned and are not held accountable for their actions, it will be impossible to eradicate these practices in which the European Commission is now interested. This is very serious, bearing in mind the doctrine of the ECJ, which establishes that final judgments of High Courts of the Member States are binding throughout the European Union. The Supreme Court of the Kingdom of Spain and certain High Courts of Justice are issuing rulings and judgments that are totally contrary to European Union Law. They apply reprisals against whistleblowers and apply torture and degrading treatment. They feel unpunished. We believe it is extremely important for the Rule of Law to act against these type of corruption. It affects the whole of the EU and thousands of families and citizens.
Read full response

Response to Digitalisation of justice in the European Union

2 Sept 2020

Recent EU legislation has clearly established a UNIQUE EU JURISDICTION in certain cases. It is not only articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty those that confers relevant Union competence. The EU has established the application of a common EU jurisdiction for the citizens of the Union, in certain cases. By doing so, citizens of one-member state can request that their cases be heard by judges from another member state. One of these cases is when it is evident that, for the EU citizen there is no impartiality in their national judges and, therefore, it is impossible for him to obtain the effective judicial protection enshrined in art. 47 of the Charter (CFR). The member states have expressly renounced the concepts of territorial and personal jurisdiction, as well as hierarchy and jurisdiction, as expressed in REGULATION (EU) 2017/2939, through which a judicial body -the EU Public Prosecutor’s Office- is created by the EU, which is not limited by borders or where the offender is. The European Union has full sovereignty over what it legislates. In this case, it has decided to regulate those powers that are already its own. In doing so, the EU differentiates between two different jurisdictions: • A EU jurisdiction, with a legislative pyramid with the original Law, and the secondary Law, together with judgements of the ECJ. • A subsidiary jurisdiction, the national justice of member states. DIRECTIVE (UE) 2019/1937, Whistleblowers Directive, in its art. 22, establishes the Charter (CFR) as the supreme regulatory framework, ignoring Constitutions or Bills Of Rights of member states. It establishes the right to report violations of UE Law as a right without borders -as referred to in art. 11 CFR- and as an inseparable consequence of it, the right to obtain Justice also without borders within the EU -measure of protection to the citizen- in order to prioritize independence and impartiality: the full effective judicial protection, enshrined in art. 47 CFR. The EU citizen can not only report an infringement of Union Law in any member state. Any Judge of a member state may admit that complaint and, if it falls within the scope of what is established by the EU, will be obliged to investigate and judge it. The 1st rule was in DIRECTIVE (EU) 2017/1371 on the fight against fraud. In it, a single EU jurisdiction is established for the 1st time: jurisdiction is no longer territorial or of the states. Jurisdiction became global among the EU and any citizen can request legal aid and prosecution in any state of the Union. For active corruption (art. 4.2.a) and international embezzlement, which “in any way harms the financial interest of the Union” as established in the Directive in its art. 4.3. The 2nd rule is REGULATION (EU) 2017/1939, for the creation of the EU Public Prosecutor’s Office. Said Regulation sets a new power, the right to evocation (whereas (13) and art. 27), which allows to remove the investigations of one country and prosecute it in another more prone to the interests of the UE: a single jurisdiction. The 3rd is DIRECTIVE (UE) 2019/1937 Whistleblowers Directive. Plus previous points, one characteristic is relevant: the administration of Justice enters in its scope. The initiative should go further. The EU, according to its own legislation, should create a common system to be used in every member state and centrally controlled by the EU. Then will start REALLY TARGETING CORRUPTION IN JUSTICE. To give two simple examples in Spain: one, the way judicial cases are assigned to the different Courts. The other, the denial of the right to appeal to different Judges when you are dealing with High Courts as first instance. Put a common system and corruption will be cut. There are no limits on EU competence to design, develop, and force every single member country to use a common EU software in every single EU Court of Justice. Art. 22 of EU Directive 2019/1937. It is not COVID. It is existing EU Law.
Read full response

Response to European Democracy Action Plan

11 Jul 2020

As the document highlights, the erosion of democracy is a real problem, as is the decreasing levels of trust in governments and media. But, from our perspective: disinformation through media, deteriorated media freedom, election integrity and violation of civil society right, all suffer from the same major problem that makes extremely difficult any improvement without challenging and facing what is, in fact, the real problem and the very major threat: judicial corruption. In Spain, at least, we have a good number of judges that do not respect at all not only national law, but particularly European Law. They do not respect original law, neither derivative law. They act as if it doesn't exist and when they are claimed to act as European judges ruling based in UE law, they just ignore it. If citizens claim against these judges, corporatism become fierce and it becomes impossible to obtain any positive result. They normally deny any possible investigation and later use retaliations against those who have the strength to claim. This is nothing related with a political problem. It is not related at all with the Catalan issue or any potential independence claim. These judges we are referring are basically common criminals, that use the power of their jurisdiction to commit crimes, support criminals and torture European citizens. This major problem is silenced in media. Impossible to think in media freedom or correct information about this issue. The news that appear about judicial corruption are just an small fraction of the real problem. Of course journalist are aware of the problem, but they fear retaliation from judges. Politicians never want to talk about this issue. Most of the political parties are involved in corruption, and fear retaliation from judges. Impossible to trust in election integrity if the committee that controls the correct application of elections rules is formed by judges in its majority, and the president of the committee have committed crimes that, of course, none of his colleagues have permitted to be investigated. The pressure exerted on civil society is enormous. It has become impossible to prosecute these criminal judges. No one want to look in to the problem. Even worse. Those who look at the problem and claim for justice are retaliated, illegally stripped of their property to leave them in complete vulnerability, prosecuted, convicted of crimes the did not commit or simply imprisoned without any evidence or with adulterated evidence. Of course, all this happens with none protection from the state. Everyone looks at other side and ignore the problem, even though international law and European law establishes the obligation to investigate these type of crimes ex officio. We are talking physical and psychological torture carried out repeatedly, constantly and for years against European citizens by European judges in the exercise of the jurisdiction the European Union recognizes to them. Ex officio means even without any claim being presented and just for being aware of the existence of the abuses. But the claims are presented. Even with the claims presented the silence is complete and investigations against these criminals never start. It is a risk to the whole of the European Union and the Rule of Law. What would the rest of European judges do, acting correctly -including all those Spanish judges that act correctly- when they see the repeated criminal actions of criminal judges becoming impunes, when they see that no one investigates, when they see these judges retiring with no suspicion, with their well endowed bank accounts, the victims of their ruling tortured without any compassion and the beneficiaries of the crimes acting with full impunity. There is no possibility of thinking in any type of democracy while judicial corruption is on its peak and Rule of Law is being destroyed and ignored. With total impunity. At least in one State member.
Read full response

Response to New Strategy for the Implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

20 Mar 2020

We identify THREE main difficulties to ensure the implementation of the enshrined rights in the Charter. SIXTH TITLE – JUSTICE: this is the main problem in the case of Spain. We have a number of judges that SYSTEMATICALLY do not respect the EU Law and of course, not the Charter. They have become untouchable, the feel they are immune to the Law and they rule in their court judgments, not according to the Law. Most of them are members of high Courts. And what it’s even worse: no one is effectively able to claim their personal responsibility. They keep judging, they keep breaking the laws and they make absolutely impossible for the citizens to claim the effectiveness of the Charter. (a) More than 500,000 families have lost their homes due to abusive clauses that later where confirmed as abusive by the ECJ. (b) More than 800,000 Spanish citizens have been abused by public administrations by constantly renewing their partial time job contracts. The ECJ has also recently given their opinion on this issue. (c) The ECJ has also ruled against Spain concerning the conditions for having right to appeal and the time to give for those appeals, and superior Courts keep breaking the EU Law and the principle of legality not giving the citizens either the right to appeal (Tribunal Supremo) or the correct conditions (Tribunales Superiores de Justicia). These are just some of the cases. Q: Were the Spanish judges unable to read and study the EU Law in all these different cases that were presented before them or…. They just avoided voluntarily to apply it?. No personal responsibilities have been claimed in all these judges. They acted with impunity and they keep doing it. They keep judging and they smile to lifes and families broken by their judgements. They laugh to European law and, of course, on the Chart. THIRD TITLE – EQUALITY: this is the first consequence of the previous point. An example: We have detailed information of a particular case in which 37 different judges, in different Courts -most of them high Courts-, have SISTEMATICALLY avoided and denied to make investigations on criminal charges -fully documented and proved- on a case that involved a Judge. She was caught having sexual relationships in a public place (and also having a stable and intimate relationship) with a Lawyer acting in a case in her Court of Justice. The 37 different Judges have lied to avoid any investigation. First in the claim presented against the Judge that was dismissed, denying the acceptance of the Detective’s report that proved the sexual and intimate relationship. Later on the different criminal activities derived from that claim. The consequences have been the total destruction of the citizen and also the illegally given of most of his assets to the client of the lawyer (lover of the Judge). All these actions based on illicit judicial decisions. No one of them has been investigated by the different judges. They have denied the investigations. A clear case of discrimination and reprisal… done by 37 different judges. It is SYSTEMATIC. Happens more often than what you would imagine. FIRST TITLE – DIGNITY: prohibition of torture. A good number of Spanish judges have become torturers. They torture citizens in the European Union and no one is ever able to claim their personal responsibilities. They have become immune. We invite the EU Comission to read and study the recent document presented by Mr Nils Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, to the UN Human Rights Council plenary last February 28th. In his Report explains and gives detail on psychological and mental torture. If the EU Commission is honestly interested in improve the use of the Charter, we hardly recommend a direct intervention of the Spanish justice, providing judges from other EU nations to insure the application of the Charter among the Spanish judges. Particularly in High Courts. Special measures are needed to believe the will of using the Charter.
Read full response

Response to Action Plan on anti-money laundering

8 Mar 2020

There are many different Regulations and Directives to regulate and control money laundering. There are also several different reports published, like the “Supranational Risk assessment report”, the “Assessment of recent high-profile money laundering cases in the financial sector”, the “Financial intelligence Units” and the “Interconnection of central bank account registries report”. Most of the effort done by the EU is focus in the banking and financial system and the need of reinforced cooperation between financial intelligence units (FIU). But…let’s go back to basics: money laundering is the process by which criminals conceal the illegal origin of the resulting property or income. In the past money laundering was funneled normally thru the banking and financial system. But IT IS NOT THE CASE ANY MORE. Measures to control money laundering are governed by the TFUE. It is our interest now to focus in Title V (police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters). Under the policies of the “Justice and fundamental rights” of the EU it is said that the Commission wants to build a European Union area of justice and it is stated that the EU wants to build an area of criminal justice, where fair trial rights for citizens are protected and police, prosecutors and judges work together. It is also stated that the rule of law is one of our core values and the EU has developed a number of instruments to promote and uphold it. But this important objective…. IT IS NOT WORKING. At least in one important country of the European Union: SPAIN. In Spain we are witness and victims of money laundering thru a different channel than banks and financial sector. (1) Money laundering it is being done with the help and direct support of a good number of judges. There fore those judges become part, cooperators and subject of the crime of money laundering. We are talking about Judges concealing the illegal origin of resulting property. (2) Other judges that have to judge their peers judges, when crimes and proofs are presented thru criminal claims, systematically deny the evidence and deny the cases in their Tribunals. They reject any possible investigation. (3) Same thing happens with prosecutors. They protect their peer judges. Most of the times, they deny the evidence and reject any possible investigation of the accusations against judges, permitting and committing the money laundering crime. When judges are the criminals or at least cooperators with their denials to investigate, the crime gets full immunity. All efforts from the EU are just thrown to the trush. Fundamental rights of European citizens burned in front of society, Financial Markets abused and no one will pay attention to it, while the abused citizens can see how their assets are stolen with the cooperation of a number of different judges and prosecutors. It is not one case. It is a systematic operation among a good number of judges that laugh at justice and at the European Union. They operate with full immunity. No one controls them. The European Union never investigates these claims. Unless something is done against this criminal and capital abuse, we will never be able, realistically, to fight money laundering and corruption in the EU. Good functioning of Justice is a responsibility of the UE territories. It is not working in Spain. You should incorporate clear rules against criminal judges and money laundering judges if you want the regulation to work. You should force investigations to be taken by foreign judges. Not Spanish judges. The Spanish justice, particularly among superior Tribunals, many times appear to be like a mafia style organization more than a legal European tool to guarantee fundamental and civil rights of citizens. Is the EU really willing to eradicate money laundering? Is the EU really willing to buid a EU area of justice? We have many documental proofs of all these claims. We will be happy to share them.
Read full response

Response to EU Strategy on victims' rights (2020-2024)

7 Mar 2020

It is extremely necessary to empower victims of crime in the EU. There is no true behind any of the fundamental rights claimed to be protected by the Charter if we don’t empower and protect the victims. There is no true behind willing to build a EU area of justice, which will make it easier for citizens to exercise their rights, if we don’t empower and protect the victims. Main focus should be put in the Justice system. It is thru the Justice system that victims can pretend to access the necessary support, to improve their protection and facilitate them access to compensations in case they have suffer the effects of a criminal attack. What happens when the Justice system works poorly? What happens when the criminals are the judges? What happens when those criminals feel that they have full impunity because their peers judges and prosecutors avoid and deny to investigate their crimes? What happens if, even in an extraordinary case they are investigated? They know that even if they are accused and doomed, they will not be charged with responsibilities and will not be paying with their personal assets the effects of their crimes? We live in the criminal empire of immune judges. Victims of those criminals are abandoned. Are systematically psychological and mentally tortured watching how those who should be giving them protection, are the ones that destroy them or permit others to destroy them, acting against the law. This is happening in the European Union. In Spain. A good number of judges, systematically, deny Justice to victims of crimes related with some types of corruption. They also act as criminals. They give full coverage to others that, with impunity, steal their assets, destroy their lives and their families and later, leave free of any accusation. Prosecutors normally avoid and deny any accusation against judges. Especially if the criminal judges are members of the highest courts. Is in those higher courts were there is more corruption among judges. Is in those higher courts where the “profitable” cases arrive and where a positive or a negative sentence can make people illegally rich and destroy others. There is NO any EFFECTIVE method of control against corruption of judges in Spain. There is NO any EFFECTIVE method of control that judges impose the law, and no their own will, when issuing their sentences. How can we empower victims when the Justice system –responsibility of the EU- in a state member –Spain- works so poorly?. It is not something that has happen once. It is not something that has happened with one, two, or three judges or prosecutors. It is SYSTEMATIC. And…. if the victim happens to be strong enough after being stolen, destroyed and tortured by judges to ask for compensations…. He/she has to go to court to ask for those compensations. What kind of justice will he/she if the criminals behind his/her destruction and torture, were the peer judges of those who have to assign the compensation?. Do not forget: corporatism among judges and prosecutors in Spain is wild. Particularly if the criminals are judges from higher courts. And do not forget: there is NO EFFECTIVE system of control and punishment of judges in Spain. It exist, of course. In reality is and EFFECTIVE tool to give protection to those criminals. We have a lot of documentation that proofs our statements. The European Commission has already received many claims against the judicial corruption in Spain. None of them seem to have worked at all. Spanish judges –of course, not all, but a good number- laugh at the European Union and laugh at the law. They feel untouchable. We will be happy to share the documents and information. How does the European Union think it will be able to empower victims if those who are really empowered, are the true criminals? Not every judge in Spain is, but good judges don’t want to confront corrupt judges. Corrupts are much more powerful. Mafia style.
Read full response