Being accused of perjury can have serious legal consequences. However, not every inaccurate statement made by a witness necessarily constitutes a crime. In this case, the court held that the defendant’s conduct was protected by a fundamental right: the right against self-incrimination.
Personal data has been omitted to preserve the confidentiality of the parties.
When can a witness be charged with the crime of perjury?
The crime of false testimony, regulated in article 458.1 of the Penal Code, punishes whoever, acting as a witness in a judicial proceeding, fails to tell the truth in a relevant way.
However, case law has made it clear that this crime cannot be analyzed in isolation, but rather by considering the context in which the statement is made and the fundamental rights of the witness.
The case: accusation of perjury in a criminal trial
The events originated during a criminal trial for breach of a restraining order. Our client appeared in the proceedings as a witness, as she is the mother of the accused.
The proceedings centered on the alleged sending of letters to the accused’s ex-partner, against whom there was a court order prohibiting communication. Since the accused was incarcerated, it was argued that the letters had been delivered through his mother.
During the trial, our client denied having made such a delivery.
The charge of perjury
Following her statement, the court determined that the witness had lied, based on the assessment made in the main case, and agreed to initiate criminal proceedings against her for an alleged crime of perjury.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office requested the following on behalf of our client:
– Nine-month prison sentence
– Special disqualification from the right to passive suffrage
– Penalty of fine
Defense against the crime of perjury
The defense strategy focused on a key aspect: our client’s statement could not be assessed in isolation, but rather in the context of a conflict between, on the one hand, the witness’s duty to be truthful and, on the other hand, the fundamental right not to incriminate oneself, recognized in Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution.
The witness’s right against self-incrimination
Had she acknowledged delivering the letters, our client would have implicitly admitted her possible involvement in the crime of breach of sentence attributed to her son.
For this reason, we maintained that his statement, even though it did not coincide with the version that was finally proven, responded to the legitimate exercise of the right of defense, which protects any person from testifying against himself.
Constitutional jurisprudence establishes that a witness cannot be required to conduct himself incriminatingly, even if this conflicts with the duty to tell the truth.
Acquittal for the crime of perjury
The Criminal Court No. 22 of Barcelona finally issued an acquittal, concluding that our client’s conduct was protected by the exercise of the constitutional right not to incriminate herself.
Consequently, the court considered that the necessary elements to establish a crime of false testimony were not present, acquitting our client of all charges brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Conclusion: when there is no crime of perjury
This case demonstrates that not every inaccuracy in a judicial statement constitutes a crime. When the statement is made in a context where the witness could face criminal charges, the fundamental right against self-incrimination prevails.
Crimes against the administration of justice always require a detailed legal analysis of the specific case and the conflicting rights.
