“The Military Penal Code establishes disproportionate sanctions and limitations that violate the fundamental rights of civil guards.” Loud and clear, The Unified Association of the Civil Guard (AUGC) denounces what they define as an “anomaly” in the Rule of Law. Because, despite the fact that 99% of the agents’ functions are already far from the military sphere, a military disciplinary regime continues to be applied to them.
Such is the situation that military courts hear more cases from the Civil Guard than from the three branches of the Armed Forces (Army, Air Force and Navy). Specifically, 81% of contentious-disciplinary proceduresaccording to the latest annual data from the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) for 2022. And of these, around 59% were dismissed by ruling. Hence, the association warns that “the Military Penal Code is being used as repressive labor tool of workers“.
In their opinion, the Armed Institute already has a very severe disciplinary regime, which is why they demand a legislative reform that eliminates the application of the Military Penal Code on civil guards. The goal? That agents “can perform their duties with dignity, without fear of disproportionate reprisals typical of another time.”“. They demand that their work be regulated under the Ordinary Penal Code, as is the case with the rest of the State Police, and that regulations designed for military situations and in the context of war stop being applied to them.
The exceptions
In short, request the deletion of article 1.5which establishes that “the Military Penal Code will apply to members of the Civil Guard and students belonging to the training education of said body when it comes to actions or omissions constituting a military crime“. And, instead, they ask that it be strictly applied in the following cases:
- In time of armed conflict
- During the validity of the State of Siege
- In the fulfillment of the military missions entrusted to them
- While they are integrated into Armed Forces Units
Controversial reform in 2015
He January 15, 2016 the new Military Penal Code came into forceapproved in October 2015 in a hurry and with a government in office, that of Mariano Rajoy’s PP, which used its absolute majority to counteract the votes against the opposition. Already then the Unified Association of the Civil Guard denounced that the objective of this rule was “to silence the voice of the civil guards, restrict their right to freedom of expression and make the work of professional associations difficult.” Because in his opinion, the objective sought was none other than “remilitarization”.
Added to the “lack of transparency” was “defencelessness”, since the simple demonstration of a command serves to condemn a civil guard “with the excuse of safeguarding discipline.” From the AUGC they also denounced that the training of Military Courts, in a specialty that is not even taught in Universities, since Military Criminal Law is not part of the subjects taught among law school students.
And at this point an endless number of questions arose: Is it right that a rule designed by the military and for the military can be applied to civilian citizens? Can’t discipline be maintained without this rule? Why does it include crimes that are already in the ordinary Penal Code? Is it necessary to provide the general director of the Civil Guard with military authority, despite being a civilian? How is the dignity of the Civil Guard measured?… insurmountable ambiguities, which in the opinion of the association, create legal uncertainty and lack of knowledge among the commanders themselves when applying it.
In conclusion, the entry into force of this rule meant closing the “circle of a planned and remilitarization of the Civil Guard.” planned from the bunker of the General Directorate of the Civil Guard itself“, with the sole objective of counteracting the advances already achieved.