2 and a half years in prison. Defendant alleges error while testing the system to learn how to use it. And he cited drug addiction and procedural delays.
The Supreme Court of Spain confirmed the conviction, 2 and a half years in prisonof a municipal employee for a continued crime of falsification of official documents.
The defendant is accused of having used fraudulent the Social Security system to register as municipal workers, three women from his personal circle — the companion, ex-partner and former sister-in-law – despite there is no contract or employment relationship with the municipality.
The case dates back to 2016, when the defendant, an employee of the Ayuntamiento de Guadalmez (province of Ciudad Real), had authorized access to the Social Security system due to the functions he performeddescribes the .
Between July and November of that year, it registered three “highs” as if those targeted were workers, creating an appearance of hiring non-existent. Registrations would eventually be canceled by Social Security in August 2017, after being detected as fictitious.
According to the process, it was not proven that, through these records, the women received undue benefits, nor that they knew about the maneuver.
The three workers they were acquitted
Still, the courts considered that the employee knowingly altered the truth in official documentswhich is enough to fill in the legal type of the crime, regardless of whether there was an actual profit or loss.
In the first instance, the Ciudad Real Provincial Hearing condemned the defendant for continued crime of forgery of official documentsbased on articles 390 and 74 of the Spanish Penal Code.
The penalty set was 2 years and 6 months in prison, special disqualification from exercising public functions and a fine corresponding to 10 months.
New feature
The Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha confirmed the decision on appeal.
The employee then took the case to the Supreme Court, claiming thatThere was no intention to falsify, arguing that everything resulted from “practices” and of a error when testing the system to learn how to use it.
The Supreme Court rejected the thesis: it was demonstrated that the defendant had been operating the system since 2008 and there were no technical changes that would justify tests of this kind.
Furthermore, it came to issue payroll and salary slipsfor two of the registered people, even if they have not been paidwhich, for the court, reveals a deliberate intervention and not a mere computer lapse.
The defendant also requested an additional reduction of the sentence, citing drug addiction e procedural delays.
The Supreme Court understood, however, that its capacity for self-determination was only slightly affected and that the overall duration of the process — around 5 years — did not reach the level necessary to consider the delays “very qualified”. As a result, the appeal was rejected and the conviction was upheld.
