FELIPE VI

KING OF SPAIN

To all who present it and understand it.

Sabed: That the General Cortes have approved and I come to sanction the following organic law:

PREAMBLE

I

The proposal for a Penal Code presented by the Institutional Commission for the elaboration of an articulated text of the Law of Criminal Procedure, constituted by the Agreement of the Council of Ministers of March 2, 2012, Currently subjected to public information and debate, it presents a radical change of the criminal justice system whose implementation requires a broad consensus. While this debate remains, in the confidence of finding the maximum possible concert on the new criminal procedural model, it is necessary to deal immediately with certain issues that cannot wait to be resolved with the enactment of the new normative text to replace the more than century-old Criminal Prosecution Act.

Among these issues are the strengthening of procedural rights in accordance with the requirements of European Union law and the regulation of technological research measures in the field of rights to privacy, to the secrecy of communications and to the protection of personal data guaranteed by the Constitution.

II

By regulating these matters, this law directly affects articles 18 and 24 of the Spanish Constitution, since it introduces legal, substantive and procedural changes that affect the very own area of the organic law, as soon as the law is concerned. which develops fundamental rights and public freedoms enshrined in this constitutional precept.

Throughout all these years, there has been no common criteria that serve as the basis for determining what contents of the Criminal Procedure Law should be subject to the reserve of organic law, differentiating them from the those others whose regulation was to be carried out by ordinary law. On many occasions, procedural precepts were high in rank: sometimes in application of what the Constitutional Court has called "related subjects", that is, those " that in attention to reasons of thematic connection or systematicity or good legislative policy considers it appropriate to include in addition to the subjects reserved to the organic law " (STC 5/1981); in others, to affect laws that specifically have to have organic nature, as is the case of the Law Organic from the Judicial Branch or the Penal Code.

In addition, it cannot be known that the case law of the Constitutional Court on the legal development of certain fundamental rights and the delimitation of its essential content has undergone variations throughout the all these years with inevitable impact on those regulations which, for their contents, should be included in the reservation of article 81.1 of the Constitution.

The reform of the Criminal Procedure Law that is now being promoted includes measures that develop fundamental rights and others of a strictly procedural nature. Since the latter do not constitute a necessary complement to organic materials, it is considered preferable to be processed through independent rules of different range.

For all this, the legislative initiative that focuses on forecasts of organic nature, such as those that occupy this law (strengthening the procedural rights of the defendants and the detainees or prisoners, has been chosen). Regulation of the limiting research measures of Article 18 of the Constitution), are regulated in an ad hoc organic range standard.

III

It is necessary to transpose Directive 2013 /48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right to legal assistance in criminal proceedings and in the national law of the Member States. procedures relating to the European arrest warrant, and on the right to be informed of a third party at the time of deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third parties and with consular authorities during the deprivation of liberty. To this end, Articles 118, 509, 520 and 527 are amended and a new Article 520 b is introduced in the Criminal Procedure Act with the introduction of the provisions required by European Union law, which include the rule of law. Lawyer assistance to the detainee.

The right to legal assistance in criminal proceedings, the right to a report of deprivation of liberty to a third party and the right to communicate with third parties and with consular authorities during the deprivation of liberty are based on the provisions of Articles 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights. The amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Law will facilitate the application of these rights, guaranteeing fundamental aspects of the defense in criminal proceedings.

For this reason, the current article 118 of the Law on Criminal Procedure, in which the right of defense is regulated, is modified, recognizing in a clear and precise manner that every person to whom the commission of an act is attributed It may exercise its right of defence, without any limitations other than those provided for in the law, as a time frame for the exercise of this right from the attribution of the punishable fact under investigation to the death penalty itself. It is essential for the right of defence to have the assistance of a lawyer of free designation or, failing that, of a lawyer of his own office, with whom he may communicate and interview in reserve at any time since he is assigned the right of (a) a punishable act and which shall be present in all its declarations and in all cases of recognition, carriage or reconstruction in fact are carried out.

Special mention requires the question of the recognition of the confidentiality of the communications between the investigated or the defendant and his lawyer, which may be limited when certain circumstances are present, such as the presence of objective indications of the involvement of the lawyer in the criminal act investigated.

All rights to be investigated or caused shall be provided in language that is understandable and adapted to the personal circumstances of the recipient, taking into account age, degree of maturity or disability.

When it comes to persons who have been detained or deprived of liberty, these rights are set out in Article 520 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is strictly adapted to the requirements of European legislation, The Court of Justice has stated, inter alia, the right of the detainee to appoint a lawyer with whom he may interview himself, even before he is received by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority. Where, due to geographical remoteness, the immediate assistance of a lawyer is not possible, the person shall be provided with a telephone communication or a video conference with him, unless such communication is impossible. It also regulates the right to inform a family member of their deprivation of liberty, the right to communicate by telephone with a third party of their choice and the right to communicate with the consular authorities, in case of detainees or prisoners. foreign.

In this precept, in order to complete the status of the detained investigation, the obligation is established that the police state should reflect the place and time of the arrest and the release of the judicial or the release. In order to ensure constitutional rights to the honour, privacy and image of the detainee, following the doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights which requires that detention be respectful of human dignity and that it does not constitute a In the case of the Commission, the Commission has taken into account the fact that the Commission has taken the necessary measures to ensure that the aid is granted to the Member States in respect of the aid granted to the Member States. State Attorney General and the Ministry of the Interior. Such protection cannot lose sight of, however, respect for the fundamental right to information, in the terms laid down in Article 20 of the Constitution and according to the doctrine of the Constitutional Court, as a manifestation of the State Law.

The so-called "incommunicado prison" has also been the subject of revision in this reform, in order to bring it into line with the requirements of European Union law. The new regulation of Article 527 allows for this method of detention to be applied when the legally intended budgets are met in accordance with the new wording given to Article 509. In addition, the judge is empowered to limit some rights according to the needs of each case, without this restriction being automatically and undifferentiated from everyone, and for the strictly necessary time.

In relation to minors, the fact and place of custody shall be communicated as soon as possible to those who exercise the parental authority, the guardianship or the keeping of those, and shall be made available to the Sections of Minors of the Prosecution. In the event of a conflict of interest between minors and those who exercise the parental rights, guardianship or guardian of fact, a judicial defender will be appointed to whom the information will be provided.

In the case of persons with legal-modified capacity, it will be reported to those who exercise the guardianship or the fact that they are in fact, and will be aware of this to the Prosecutor's Office.

Finally, a specific rule is introduced for the arrests in marine spaces far from the Spanish territory, responding to the situations that were occurring in the absence of legal foresight for these areas. assumptions.

IV

The Criminal Procedure Law has not been able to escape the passage of time. Renewed forms of crime linked to the use of new technologies have revealed the inadequacy of a regulatory framework designed for different times. The information flows generated by the telematic communication systems warn of the possibilities that lie within the scope of the offender, but they also provide powerful investigative tools to the public authorities. Thus the need to find a delicate balance between the capacity of the State to deal with a criminal phenomenology of new cuno and the space of exclusion that our constitutional system guarantees to every citizen in front of third parties. However meritorious the effort of judges and courts to define the limits of the State in the investigation of the crime, the abandonment of the jurisprudential creation of what has to be the object of legislative regulation has led to a deficit In the democratic quality of our procedural system, the lack of dogmatic and supranational bodies has remembered. Recently, the Constitutional Court has pointed to the undeferred nature of a regulation that addresses the privacy of the investigation in criminal proceedings. Today, they lack coverage and their cure cannot be obtained by going to a voluntarist case of analogue integration that overflows the limits of the constitutionally acceptable. Only in this way will it be possible to avoid the negative impact that the current state of affairs is projecting in relation to some of the constitutional rights that may be the object of limitation in criminal proceedings.

The arrest and opening of written and telegraphic correspondence is updated in a new article 579, where its material scope is being implemented, while the maximum duration and the exceptions to it are regulated. the need for judicial authorization in accordance with a consolidated case-law. In particular, and as regards the first of the highlights, the reform opts, compared to other models compared with a casuistic enumeration of the crimes that authorize this means of investigation, for demanding the concurrency, not cumulative, of any of the three requirements defined in paragraph 1 of this Article and shall serve as a reference for the setting of the scope of other investigative measures. The first one operates as a generic limitation, of a quantitative nature, linked to the gravity of the sentence: intentional crimes punishable by a maximum limit of more than three years in prison. Along with this budget, two more are added: that you are in the presence of crimes committed within a group or criminal organisation, or that you are dealing with terrorist offences. A new Article 579a is introduced concerning the use of the result of this diligence in a different criminal procedure, in particular as regards the treatment of so-called "casual findings" and the continuation of the measure, in that case. another process, which will require a new court order to validate this situation. This forecast will serve as a guideline for other technological research measures.

The other measures of technological research are the subject of attention in Chapters V to VII of Title VIII of Book II of the Law of Criminal Procedure, and all of them result from the application of the common provisions introduced in Chapter IV. The traditional systematic of this title has been reordered in order to accommodate the indefatiable regulation of this matter. This makes use of a formal historical scheme that, despite the practical problems arising from its obsolescence, has the advantage of having been the subject of frequent attention by the case law of the Supreme Court.

The normative proclamation of the principles that the Constitutional Court has defined as determining the validity of the act of interference has been considered appropriate. All measures must be in response to the principle of specialisation. This requires that the action in question is intended to clarify a particular point of fact, since the measures of technological research of a prospective nature, in accordance with the concept of the doctrine, are prohibited. Please add the maximum interpreter of the Constitution, for all the judgment 253/2006, of September 11. Technological research measures must also satisfy the principles of suitability, exceptionality, necessity and proportionality, the concurrence of which must be sufficiently justified in the enabling judicial decision, where the judge will determine the nature and extent of the measure in relation to the specific investigation and the expected results.

The reform has considered it appropriate not to abandon the formal aspects of the application and the content of the enabling judicial resolution. The forensic practice is not alien to cases of police requests and subsequent judicial decisions that suffer from a laconism that is liable to violate the constitutional duty of motivation. To avoid this effect, the thorough regulation of the content of that request is directed, as well as of the judicial resolution that, if necessary, enables the measure of interference. The common provisions also extend to other questions of form, such as the request for an extension, the general rules of duration, the secrecy, the control of the measure, the affectation to third parties, the use of information in a different procedure, the cessation of the measure or the destruction of records. Each diligence will modulate some of these aspects and will be governed by specific rules of their own particularity.

relation to the interception of telephone and telematic communications, in the determination of the material scope of application, the same criterion already evidenced above by reference is followed, although they are added to the list of crimes committed by computer tools or any other information technology or telecommunications.

In the new regulation, its own substance is given to other forms of telematic communication that have lacked normative treatment in the procedural law. The difficulties associated with this vacuum have been multiplied in practice by a jurisprudential interpretation of the legislation called to govern the obligation of the operators to preserve the data generated by the communications. electronic, which has degraded the widespread instruments of telematic communication-for example, SMS messages or e-mail-to the condition of accessories, of forced sacrifice whenever a decision is taken Telephone intervention court. In view of this concept, the new text authorizes the intervention and registration of communications of any kind that are made through the telephone or any other means or system of telematic, logical or virtual communication. But it subjects the interception of all of them-in their own differentiated instrumentality-to the general principles that the text proclaims. This is intended to be the judge himself, pondering the gravity of the fact that is being investigated, which determines the extent of state interference in particular communications. The enabling resolution must therefore specify the objective and subjective scope of the measure. In other words, it will have to motivate, in the light of those principles, whether the sacrifice of telephone communications is not sufficient and whether the investigation requires, in addition, the interception of SMS, MMS or any other form of telematic communication of bidirectional character.

A period of three months is set as the initial maximum duration of the intervention, which is likely to be extended and extended, upon request reasoned for successive periods of equal duration, up to a temporary maximum of eighteen months, provided that the causes that motivated the latter persist. In this way, a balance is sought between the need to take advantage of these measures for the investigation of the most serious crimes for society and the importance of defining chronological limits that do not unnecessarily prolong the interference of public authorities in the privacy of citizens affected by the measure.

In order to ensure the authenticity and integrity of the supports made available to the judge, the use of a sealing or electronic signature system is imposed to guarantee the information flown from the central system. This measure is parallel to that required in other jurisdictional orders for the full validity of the documents submitted to the process in electronic form and it is in line with a jurisprudential line of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court.

The regulation is complete with a precept intended to fix the terms of the deletion and deletion of the original recordings, once the procedure is finished. This is intended to prevent any dissemination of a material which, by its own content, could irreparably damage the privacy of the person concerned.

In the investigation of some criminal acts, the incorporation into the process of the electronic data of traffic or associates can be of decisive importance. The reform welcomes the criterion laid down by Law 25/2007 of 18 October on the retention of data relating to electronic communications and public communications networks, and imposes the requirement of a judicial authorisation for the transfer of data to the public. authorised agents, provided that they are data related to communication processes. Their incorporation into the process is only authorised in the case of the investigation of a crime which, for reasons linked to the principle of proportionality, is of those which justify the sacrifice of the inviolability of the communications. An individual legal treatment is given to the access by police officers to the IMSI, IMEI, IP address and other identification elements of a particular card or terminal, in line with a case law of the Supreme Court consolidated on this subject. It is also regulated the assumption of the transfer of data disengaged from the communication processes concerning the ownership or identification of an electronic device, which may be accessed by the Prosecutor's Office or the Judicial Police in the exercise of their duties without the need for judicial authorisation.

Experience shows that, in the investigation of certain crimes, the collection and recording of open oral communications through the use of electronic devices may be indispensable. This is a matter hitherto absent from the regulation of criminal proceedings and the scope of which is dealt with subject to two key ideas. The first, the requirement that the judge should be the one to legitimize the act of interference; the second, the need for the guiding principles of specialty, exceptionality, suitability, necessity and proportionality to act as elements of justification for the measure. This measure can only be agreed upon for specific meetings to be carried out in order to maintain the investigation, with the place or dependencies to be identified with precision. Therefore, no authorisations for the collection and recording of general or indiscriminate oral conversations can be carried out, and, consequently, the listening device and, where appropriate, the cameras to the partner, must be deactivated as soon as possible. the conversation the collection of which was permitted, as is apparent from Article 588 c.

The reform also addresses the regulation of the use of technical monitoring and location devices. The incidence that in the privacy of any person may have the knowledge by the public authorities of their spatial location, makes the authorization for their practice be attributed to the judge of instruction. The same chapter enables the recording of the image in public space without the need for judicial authorization, in so far as there is no effect on any of the fundamental rights of article 18 of our constitutional text.

The law aims to end another regulatory vacuum. This is the recording of mass storage computing devices and the remote recording of computer equipment. With regard to the former, the reform rules out any doubt that these communication tools and, where appropriate, the storage of information are more than just pieces of conviction. Hence the demanding regulation regarding access to its content. As far as the remote register-due diligence already in good part of European legislation-is concerned, the intense degree of interference involved in its adoption justifies the fact that the objective of the measure is even strengthened, bounded with a listing numerus clausus the offenses that can be enabled, and the time duration to be limited, having opted for a duration of one month extendable for the same time periods up to the three months.

Finally, and as far as the measures of technological research are concerned, the reform contemplates as a measure of insurance the order of data retention, the purpose of which is to guarantee the preservation of data and information. (a) any class that is stored in a computer system until the corresponding judicial authorisation is obtained for its disposal. In this way, your subsequent contribution as a means of testing or, if necessary, your forensic analysis will not be frustrated by the disappearance, alteration or deterioration of inherently volatile elements. This rule takes as a reference Article 16 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001, ratified by Spain on 20 May 2010, and sets a maximum period of validity of the order of ninety days to be extended until the cession is authorized or one hundred and eighty days.

It is idle to explain the importance of the so-called undercover agent for the pursuit of certain criminal modalities. Well, closely related to previous technological research measures, the reform updates the use of such resources by the undercover agent in the tasks entrusted to it. In particular, it provides for the possibility for undercover agents to be able to obtain images and to record conversations, provided that they specifically seek a judicial authorisation for this; and from another, the figure of the agent is regulated. Computer cover, which requires judicial authorization to act on closed channels of communication (since in open channels, by its very nature, it is not necessary) and in turn, it will require a special authorization (be it in the same Judgment of the Court of Justice, with a separate and sufficient statement of reasons, sending illegal files for the reason of their content in the course of an investigation.

V

The reform also aims to adapt the language of the Criminal Procedure Law to current times and, in particular, to eliminate certain expressions used indiscriminately in the law, without any kind of rigour. The Court of Justice held that the Court of Justice held that the Court of Justice held that the Court of Justice and the Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Union commission of a punishable fact. To this end, the Commission for the Clarity of Legal Language was convened, whose recommendations were taken into account in the drafting of the precepts of this law. Among its conclusions is the need to avoid the negative and stigmatizing connotations of this expression, accommodating the language to the reality of what happens in each of the phases of the criminal process, reasons that must lead us to the substitution of the word imputed by others more appropriate, as they are investigated and caused, according to the procedural phase. The reform has made these conclusions its own. And thus, the first of these terms will serve to identify the person under investigation for their relationship with a crime; whereas with the term in question, the person to whom the judicial authority will be appointed will be appointed in general. The Court of the Court of the European Court of the European Court of the European Court of Without prejudice to the fact that, throughout this law, it has already been carried out in accordance with such a conceptual and terminological adjustment, in paragraph twenty, the appropriate replacement of the aforementioned terms with respect to the rest of the articles of the Law of Criminal prosecution. In any case, this substitution does not affect other nomenclatures used to define the investigation or caused by their relationship to the procedural situation in which they are located. Thus, the terms "accused" or "processed" are maintained, which may be used in an indistinct manner to that of "caused" in the appropriate phases.

VI

The rules provided for in this law will apply to all criminal proceedings that are initiated after their entry into force. However, in order to ensure that the guarantees provided for, relating to the status of the investigated and detained and technological research measures, are immediately operational in the course of the proceedings, such guarantees are also provided for. the law enforcement and prosecution, decisions and legal proceedings to be agreed upon entry into force. This will in no way imply that the validity of the decisions taken or actions taken prior to and in accordance with the legality then in force can be questioned.

Single item. Amendment of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The Criminal Procedure Act is amended as follows:

One. Article 118 is amended as follows:

" Article 118.

1. Any person to whom a punishable act is attributed may exercise the right of defence, intervening in the proceedings, since the person has been informed of its existence, has been the subject of detention or any other precautionary measure or has been agreed upon. processing, for which the following rights shall be instructed without undue delay:

(a) Right to be informed of the facts attributed to it, as well as any relevant changes in the subject matter of the investigation and the facts imputed. This information shall be provided with sufficient detail to enable the effective exercise of the right of defence.

(b) the right to examine the proceedings in good time in order to safeguard the right of defence and in any event prior to the taking of a statement.

c) Right to act in criminal proceedings to exercise their right of defence in accordance with the provisions of the law.

(d) the right to appoint a lawyer, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 527 (1) (a).

e) Right to request free legal assistance, procedure to do so, and conditions to obtain it.

(f) Right to free translation and interpretation in accordance with the provisions of Articles 123 and 127.

g) Right to remain silent and not to make a statement if you do not wish to do so, and not to answer any or some of the questions put to you.

h) Right not to testify against yourself and not to confess guilty.

The information referred to in this paragraph shall be provided in a language that is understandable and accessible. For this purpose, information shall be adapted to the age of the recipient, his degree of maturity, disability and any other personal circumstances from which he may derive a modification of the ability to understand the extent of the information given to him. facilitates.

2. The right of defence shall be exercised without further limitations than those expressly provided for in the law from the attribution of the punishable fact under investigation to the termination of the penalty.

The right of defence includes the legal assistance of a lawyer of free designation or, failing that, a lawyer of his own office, with whom he may communicate and interview himself, even before he is received a statement by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 527, and which shall be present in all its declarations and in the proceedings for recognition, carriage and reconstruction of facts.

3. To act in the process, persons under investigation must be represented by procuratorate and defended by a lawyer, appoint them ex officio when they have not appointed them by themselves and request it, and in any case, when they have no aptitude legal to do so.

If they have not appointed a solicitor or a lawyer, they will be required to do so or they will be appointed ex officio if, required, they do not appoint them, when the cause comes to a state where the advice of those or to try some resource that would make it essential to act.

4. All communications between the investigated or the defendant and his lawyer shall be confidential.

If these conversations or communications have been captured or intervened during the execution of any of the proceedings under this law, the judge will order the removal of the recording or the delivery to the recipient of the Correspondence stopped, putting these circumstances on record in the proceedings.

The provisions of the first paragraph shall not apply where the existence of objective indications of the involvement of the lawyer in the criminal act under investigation or of his involvement together with the investigation or damage is established. in the commission of another criminal offence, without prejudice to the provisions of the General Penitentiary Act.

5. The admission of a complaint or complaint, and any procedural actions resulting from the imputation of a crime against certain persons or persons, shall be immediately brought to the attention of the alleged perpetrators. "

Two. Two new paragraphs 6 and 7 are added to Article 282 bis with the following wording:

" 6. The investigating judge may authorize officials of the Judicial Police to act under alleged identity in communications held in closed channels of communication in order to clarify any of the crimes referred to in the paragraph 4 of this Article or any offence provided for in Article 588 b a.

The undercover agent, with specific authorization to do so, may exchange or send illicit files for the sake of its content and analyze the results of the algorithms applied for identification. of such illegal files.

7. In the course of an investigation carried out by means of an undercover agent, the competent judge may authorise the obtaining of images and the recording of the conversations which may be held in the meetings between the agent and the investigated, even if they are developed inside a home. "

Three. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are amended, and a new paragraph 4 is inserted in Article 509, which is worded as follows:

" 1. The judge or tribunal may exceptionally, by means of a reasoned decision, agree to the detention or imprisonment of any of the following circumstances:

(a) urgent need to avoid serious consequences that could endanger the life, liberty or physical integrity of a person, or

b) urgent need for immediate action by the judges to avoid serious criminal proceedings.

2. Incommunicationshall last the time strictly necessary for urgent action to avoid the dangers referred to in the preceding paragraph. The communication shall not extend beyond five days. In cases where the prison is agreed on account of any of the offences referred to in Article 384 bis or other offences committed in concert and organised by two or more persons, the communication may be extended for a further period of time. not more than five days. "

" 4. In no case shall the persons under 16 years of age be held incommunicado. "

Four. New wording is given to paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of Article 520 and new paragraphs 2a, 7 and 8 are introduced in this same precept, which shall have the following content:

" 1. Detention and provisional imprisonment must be carried out in the form that least harms the detainee or inmate in his person, reputation and heritage. Those who agree to the measure and those in charge of practicing it, as well as subsequent transfers, shall ensure the constitutional rights to the honor, privacy and image of those, with respect to the fundamental right to freedom of information.

The preventive detention will not be able to last longer than the time strictly necessary for the realization of the investigations aimed at the clarification of the facts. Within the time limits laid down in this Law, and in any event within the maximum period of seventy-two hours, the detainee shall be released or at the disposal of the judicial authority.

The address must reflect the place and time of the detention and the making available to the judicial authority or, where appropriate, the release.

2. Any person arrested or detained shall be informed in writing, in a simple and accessible language, in a language which he understands and immediately, of the facts attributed to him and the reasons for his deprivation of liberty, as well as of the rights that assist you and especially the following:

a) Right to keep silent, not declaring if you do not want, not to answer some or some of the questions asked of you, or to show that you will only testify before the judge.

b) Right not to declare against yourself and not to confess guilty.

(c) the right to appoint a lawyer, without prejudice to Article 527 (1) (a), and to be assisted by him without undue delay. If, due to geographical remoteness, the assistance of a lawyer is not immediately possible, the person shall be provided with a telephone communication or a video conference with him, unless such communication is impossible.

d) Right to access the elements of the actions that are essential to challenge the legality of detention or deprivation of liberty.

(e) the right to be brought to the attention of the family member or person who wishes, without undue delay, to be deprived of his or her freedom and the place of custody in which he is at any time. Foreigners will have the right to have the above circumstances communicated to their country's consular post.

f) Right to communicate by telephone, without undue delay, with a third party of your choice. This communication shall be held in the presence of a police officer or, where appropriate, the official appointed by the judge or the prosecutor, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 527.

g) Right to be visited by the consular authorities of your country, to communicate and to maintain correspondence with them.

h) the right to be assisted free of charge by an interpreter, in the case of a foreigner who does not understand or does not speak the Spanish or the official language of the performance in question, or of deaf or hearing-impaired persons, as well as other people with language difficulties.

i) the right to be recognized by the medical examiner or his legal substitute and, failing that, by the institution in which he is located, or by any other dependent of the State or other Public Administrations.

j) Right to request free legal assistance, procedure to do so, and conditions to obtain it.

You will also be informed of the maximum legal period of duration of detention pending the provision of the judicial authority and the procedure by which you can challenge the legality of your detention.

When a statement of rights is not available in a language that includes the detainee, you will be informed of your rights through an interpreter as soon as possible. In this case, the written declaration of rights in a language which it understands shall be delivered, subsequently and without undue delay.

In all cases, the detainee will be allowed to retain in his possession the written declaration of rights throughout the time of detention.

2a. The information referred to in the previous paragraph shall be provided in a language which is understandable and accessible to the addressee. For these purposes, information shall be adapted to your age, degree of maturity, disability and any other personal circumstances that may result in a limitation of the ability to understand the extent of the information provided to you.

3. If the detainee is foreign, the consul of his country shall be informed of the fact of his detention and the place of custody and shall be permitted to communicate with the consular authority. In case the detainee has two or more nationalities, he/she may choose which consular authorities should be informed that he/she is deprived of liberty and who he/she wishes to communicate with.

4. If it is a minor, it will be made available to the Sections of Minors of the Public Prosecutor's Office and the fact and the place of custody will be communicated to those who exercise the parental authority, the guardianship or the guardian of fact of the same, as soon as it is known of the age minority.

In the event of a conflict of interest with those who exercise the rights of the child, the guardianship or the guardian of the child shall be appointed as a judicial defender who shall be brought to the attention of the fact and the place of detention.

If the detainee has his or her modified capacity judicially, the information provided for in paragraph 2 of this article will be communicated to those who exercise the guardianship or guardian of the same, giving account to the Prosecutor's Office.

If the detainee or with a modified capacity judicially abroad, the fact of the arrest will be notified to the Consul of his country of office.

5. The detainee will freely designate a lawyer and if he does not do so, he will be assisted by a lawyer. No authority or agent shall make any recommendation on the lawyer to designate beyond informing him of his/her right.

The authority holding the detainee shall immediately inform the Bar Association of the name of the person designated by the detainee to assist him for the purposes of his or her location and transmission of the professional order or, in your case, shall inform you of the request for appointment of a lawyer.

If the detainee has not appointed a lawyer, or the chosen person refuses the assignment or is not found, the Bar shall immediately proceed to the appointment of an attorney for the office of office.

The appointed lawyer will go to the detention centre with the maximum amount of time, always within the maximum three-hour period from the receipt of the order. If, within that period, he does not appear, the Bar shall appoint a new lawyer for the office of office, who shall be required to appear as soon as possible and within the prescribed period, without prejudice to the requirement of disciplinary responsibility in that the incomparescent may have incurred.

6. The counsel's assistance will consist of:

(a) To request, where appropriate, to report to the detainee or prisoner of the rights set out in paragraph 2 and to proceed, if necessary, to the medical examination referred to in point (i).

(b) To intervene in the proceedings of the detainee's declaration, in the proceedings for recognition of the fact that he is the object and in those of the reconstruction of the events in which the detainee is involved. The lawyer may request the judge or official who has applied the diligence in which he has intervened, after the end of the procedure, the statement or extension of the extremes he considers appropriate, as well as the entry in the minutes of the any incident that took place during your practice.

c) Inform the detainee of the consequences of the provision or refusal of consent to the practice of proceedings that are requested.

If the detainee was opposed to the collection of the samples by oral smear, in accordance with the provisions of the Organic Law 10/2007, of 8 October, regulating the police database on identifiers obtained from of the DNA, the judge of instruction, at the request of the Judicial Police or of the Prosecutor's Office, may impose the enforced execution of such diligence by recourse to the necessary minimum coactive measures, which must be provided to the circumstances of the case and respectful of their dignity.

d) Meet with the detainee in reserve, even before being received a statement by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 527.

7. The communications between the investigated or the defendant and his lawyer shall be confidential on the same terms and with the same exceptions as provided for in Article 118 (4

.

8. However, the detainee or prisoner may waive the mandatory assistance of a lawyer if his detention is for facts likely to be classified exclusively as crimes against the safety of the traffic, provided that he has been provided with clear and sufficient information in a simple and comprehensible language on the content of the right and the consequences of the waiver. The detainee may revoke his resignation at any time. "

Five. A new article 520 ter is introduced with the following wording:

" Article 520 ter.

To those detained in marine spaces by the alleged commission of the crimes referred to in Article 23.4 (d) of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judicial Branch, the rights recognized in the present will be applied to them. a chapter to the extent that they are compatible with the personal and material means existing on board the ship or aircraft which is engaged in detention, and must be released or at the disposal of the competent judicial authority as soon as it is possible, without exceeding the maximum period of seventy-two hours. The judicial provision may be made by the telematic means at the disposal of the vessel or aircraft, where, by reason of the distance or isolation situation, it is not possible to bring the detainees to the physical presence of the authority. within the given time limit. '

Six. Article 527 is amended, which will have the following wording:

" 1. In the case of Article 509, the detainee or prisoner may be deprived of the following rights if justified by the circumstances of the case:

a) Designate a lawyer for your trust.

b) Communicate with all or any of the persons with whom you have the right to do so, except with the judicial authority, the Ministry of Public Health and the Medical Examiner.

c) Book with your lawyer.

d) Access the or your lawyer to the proceedings, except for the essential elements to be able to challenge the legality of the detention.

2. The incommunication or restriction of another right of the previous paragraph shall be agreed by order. Where the restriction of rights is requested by the Judicial Police or the Prosecutor's Office, the measures provided for in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to have been agreed upon for a maximum period of 24 hours, within which the Judge there will be a decision on the request, as well as on the relevance of agreeing on the secrecy of the proceedings. The incommunicationand the application to the detainee or prisoner of any of the exceptions referred to in the previous paragraph shall be agreed by order of reasons justifying the adoption of each of the exceptions to the general scheme of compliance with the provisions of Article 509.

The judge will effectively control the conditions in which the incommunicado will be developed, to which effect it may require information to ascertain the state of the detainee or prisoner and the respect for his rights.

3. Medical examinations of the detainee to whom the right to communicate with all or any of the persons with whom he is entitled to do so shall be restricted shall be carried out at a frequency of at least two recognitions every twenty-four hours, by optional criterion. '

Seven. The heading of Title VIII of Book II is amended as follows:

" TITLE VIII

From the measures of research limiting the rights recognized in Article 18 of the Constitution "

Eight. Articles 545 to 572 are grouped in a new Chapter I of Title VIII of Book II, the heading of which is as follows:

" CHAPTER I

From the entry and record to closed place "

Nine. Articles 573 to 578 are grouped in a new Chapter II of Title VIII of Book II, the heading of which is as follows:

" CHAPTER II

From record books and papers "

Ten. Articles 579 to 588 are grouped in a new Chapter III of Title VIII of Book II, with the following heading:

" CHAPTER III

From the arrest and opening of written and telegraphic correspondence "

Once. Article 579 is amended as follows:

" Article 579. From written or telegraphic correspondence.

1. The judge may agree to the detention of private, postal and telegraphic correspondence, including faxes, burofaxes and turns, which the investigated person refers to or receives, as well as his opening or examination, if there are indications of obtaining by these means the discovery or verification of some fact or circumstance relevant to the cause, provided that the investigation is for any of the following offences:

1. Criminal offences punishable by a maximum penalty of at least three years in prison.

2. º Crimes committed within a group or criminal organization.

3. Terrorism Crimes.

2. The judge may agree, in a reasoned decision, for a period of up to three months, which may be extended for periods up to a maximum of eighteen months, the observation of the postal and telegraphic communications of the investigation, as well as the communications of which it is intended to carry out its criminal purposes.

3. In case of urgency, when investigations are carried out for the investigation of offences related to the performance of armed bands or terrorist elements and there are reasonable reasons to make the measure provided for in the paragraphs necessary The Minister of the Interior may be ordered by the Minister of the Interior or, failing that, the Secretary of State for Security. This measure shall be communicated immediately to the competent judge and, in any event, within the maximum period of 24 hours, stating the reasons for the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the manner in which it was carried out and its result. The competent judge shall also, in a reasoned manner, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum of seventy-two hours after the measure has been ordered.

4. No judicial authorization will be required in the following cases:

(a) Postal shipments which, by their own external characteristics, are not usually used to contain individual correspondence but to serve the transport and traffic of goods or on whose exterior the goods are recorded content.

(b) Other forms of mailing of correspondence in the form of a legal form of open communication, in which an external declaration of content is required or which incorporate the express indication that their inspection.

(c) Where the inspection is carried out in accordance with the customs legislation or applicable in accordance with the postal rules governing a particular type of consignment.

5. The application and subsequent actions relating to the measure requested shall be substantiated in a separate and secret part, without the need for the confidentiality of the cause to be expressly agreed. '

Twelve. A new Article 579a is hereby established, which shall be worded as follows:

" Article 579a. Use of information obtained in a different procedure and casual discoveries.

1. The result of the arrest and opening of written and telegraphic correspondence may be used as a means of investigation or evidence in other criminal proceedings.

2. To this end, the deduction of the testimony of the individuals necessary to prove the legitimacy of the interference will be carried out. The initial application for adoption, the judgment in the court, and all requests and judgments for the extension of the procedure of origin shall be included in the original application for adoption.

3. The continuation of this measure for the investigation of the offence casually discovered requires authorization from the competent judge, for which, this will check the diligence of the performance, assessing the frame in which the casual finding occurred and the impossibility of having requested the measure which included it at the time. It shall also be reported if the proceedings continue to be declared secret, for the purposes of such a declaration being respected in the other criminal proceedings, by communicating the time at which that secret is raised. '

Thirteen. A new Chapter IV with the following heading and content is created in Title VIII of Book II:

" CHAPTER IV

Common provisions for the interception of telephone and telematic communications, the collection and recording of oral communications through the use of electronic devices, the use of devices technical tracking, locating and capturing the image, recording of mass storage devices for information, and remote logs on computer equipment

Article 588 bis a. Guiding principles.

1. During the instruction of the causes, any of the investigative measures provided for in this Chapter may be agreed provided that the judicial authorization is given in full compliance with the principles of specialty, suitability, exceptionality, necessity and proportionality of the measure.

2. The principle of specialisation requires that a measure be related to the investigation of a particular offence. Technological research measures which aim to prevent or uncover crimes or to remove suspicions without objective basis may not be authorised.

3. The principle of suitability will serve to define the objective and subjective scope and duration of the measure by virtue of its usefulness.

4. In application of the principles of exceptionality and need only the measure may be agreed:

(a) where they are not at the disposal of the investigation, taking into account their characteristics, other measures which are less burdensome for the fundamental rights of the investigation or which are also useful for the clarification of the fact, or

b) when the discovery or verification of the fact under investigation, the determination of its author or authors, the finding of its whereabouts, or the location of the effects of the crime is severely hampered without the use of this measure.

5. The investigative measures provided for in this Chapter shall be deemed to be proportionate only if, in the light of all the circumstances of the case, the sacrifice of the rights and interests concerned does not exceed the benefit of the adoption is for the public interest and third parties. For the weighting of conflicting interests, the assessment of the public interest shall be based on the gravity of the event, its social significance or the technological field of production, the intensity of the existing evidence and the relevance of the outcome. pursued with the restriction of the right.

Article 588 bis b. Application for judicial authorisation.

1. The judge may agree on the measures regulated in this chapter of trade or at the request of the Prosecutor's Office or the Judicial Police.

2. Where the Ministry of Public Prosecutor or the Judicial Police requests a measure of technological investigation from the investigating judge, the request shall contain:

1. The description of the fact under investigation and the identity of the investigated or any other affected by the measure, provided that such data is known.

2. The detailed statement of the reasons justifying the need for the measure in accordance with the guiding principles laid down in Article 588 a, as well as the evidence of criminality which has become apparent during the investigation prior to the request for authorisation of the act of interference.

3. The identification data of the investigated or the case and, where appropriate, of the means of communication used to permit the execution of the measure.

4. º The extent of the measure with specification of its contents.

5. The investigative unit of the Judicial Police who will take over the intervention.

6. The way the measure is run.

7. º The duration of the measure being requested.

8. The bound subject to carry out the measure, if known.

Article 588 bis c. Judicial resolution.

1. The investigating judge shall authorise or refuse the measure requested by a reasoned order, heard by the Prosecutor's Office. This resolution shall be issued within the maximum of 24 hours after the application is submitted.

2. Whenever it is necessary to resolve any of the requirements set out in the foregoing Articles, the judge may, subject to the time limit referred to in the preceding paragraph, require an extension or clarification of the the terms of the request.

3. The judicial decision authorising the measure shall at least specify the following:

(a) The fact that is punishable by research and its legal status, with the expression of the rational indicia in which the measure is founded.

b) The identity of the investigated and any other affected by the measure, if known.

(c) The extent of the interference measure, specifying its scope as well as the statement of reasons for compliance with the guiding principles set out in Article 588 a.

d) The investigative unit of the Judicial Police that will take over the intervention.

e) The duration of the measure.

(f) The form and periodicity with which the applicant shall inform the judge of the results of the measure.

g) The purpose pursued with the measure.

(h) The bound subject who will carry out the measure, if known, with express mention of the duty of collaboration and of keeping secret, where appropriate, under warning of incurring a crime of disobedience.

Article 588 bis d. Secret.

The request and subsequent actions relating to the measure requested shall be substantiated in a separate and secret piece, without the need for the confidentiality of the cause to be expressly agreed.

Article 588 bis e. Duration.

1. The measures provided for in this Chapter shall have the duration specified for each of them and shall not exceed the time required for the clarification of the facts.

2. The measure may be extended, by reasoned order, by the competent court, on its own initiative or on a reasoned request from the applicant, provided that the reasons for the measure remain.

3. After the period for which the measure was granted, the extension of the measure has not been agreed or, where appropriate, the extension shall cease to be effective.

Article 588 bis f. Request for extension.

1. The request for an extension shall be addressed by the Ministry of Public Prosecutor or the Judicial Police to the competent judge in good time at the expiry of the period granted. It should include in any case:

a) A detailed report of the result of the measure.

b) The reasons that justify the continuation of the same.

2. Within two days of the submission of the application, the judge shall decide on the termination of the measure or its extension by reasoned order. Prior to the decision, you may request clarification or further information.

3. If the extension is granted, the calculation shall start from the date of expiry of the agreed measure.

Article 588 bis g. Control of the measure.

The Judicial Police shall inform the judge of the development and the results of the measure, in the form and with the periodicity that it determines and, in any case, when for any reason the same ends.

Article 588 bis h. Affectation of third parties.

Regulated investigative measures may be agreed in the following chapters even if they affect third parties in cases and with the conditions that are governed by the specific provisions of each of them.

Article 588 bis i. Use of information obtained in a different procedure and casual discoveries.

The use of the information obtained in a different procedure and the casual discoveries shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of Article 579a.

Article 588 bis j. Cessation of the measure.

The judge will agree to the cessation of the measure when the circumstances that justified its adoption disappear or it is evident that the intended results are not being obtained through it, and, in any case, when there is after the deadline for which it was authorised.

Article 588 bis k. Destruction of records.

1. Once the procedure has been terminated by firm resolution, the deletion and deletion of the original records which may be recorded in the electronic and computer systems used in the execution of the measure shall be ordered. A copy shall be kept in the custody of the judicial secretary.

2. The destruction of the preserved copies shall be agreed upon after five years after the death penalty has been executed or where the offence or the penalty has been prescribed or the free release has been decreed or has been declared an absolute sentence. firm in respect of the investigation, provided that its preservation is not required in the Court's judgment.

3. The courts shall issue the appropriate orders to the Judicial Police to bring about the destruction referred to in the previous paragraphs. "

Fourteen. A new Chapter V is set out in Title VIII of Book II with the following heading and content:

" CHAPTER V

Interception of telephone and telematics communications

Section 1. General Provisions

Article 588 ter a. Budgets.

The authorization for the interception of telephone and telematic communications may only be granted when the investigation has for object any of the crimes referred to in Article 579.1 of this law or crimes committed through computer tools or any other information technology or communication or communication service.

Article 588 b. Scope.

1. The terminals or means of communication which are the subject of intervention must be those that are customary or occasionally used by the investigation.

2. The judicially agreed intervention may authorise access to the content of communications and electronic traffic data or associated with the communication process, as well as to those that occur independently of the establishment or not of a particular communication, involving the subject under investigation, either as an issuer or as a recipient, and may affect the terminals or media of which the investigation is a holder or a user.

The victim's terminals or means of communication may also be intervened where a serious risk to his or her life or integrity is foreseeable.

For the purposes set out in this article, electronic traffic data or associated data shall be understood to mean all those generated as a result of the conduct of the communication through a communications network. electronic, of its making available to the user, as well as of the provision of a service of the information society or telematic communication of a similar nature.

Article 588 ter c. Affectation to third party.

The judicial intervention of communications issued from terminals or telematic media belonging to a third person may be agreed provided that:

1. There is evidence that the subject under investigation is used to transmit or receive information, or

2. the holder collaborates with the person under investigation for his or her illicit purposes or benefits from his or her activity.

Such intervention may also be authorised where the device under investigation is used maliciously by third parties by means of telematics, without the knowledge of the holder.

Article 588 ter d. Application for judicial authorisation.

1. The application for a judicial authorisation shall contain, in addition to the requirements referred to in Article 588a b, the following:

(a) the identification of the subscriber, terminal or technical label number,

b) the identification of the connection object of the intervention or

(c) the data necessary to identify the means of telecommunication in question.

2. In order to determine the extent of the measure, the application for a judicial authorisation may be subject to one of the following:

a) The recording and recording of the content of the communication, with an indication of the form or type of communications to which it affects.

b) The knowledge of their origin or destination, at the time the communication is made.

c) The geographic location of the source or destination of the communication.

d) The knowledge of other associated or non-associated traffic data but of added value to the communication. In this case, the application shall specify the specific data to be obtained.

3. In case of urgency, when investigations are carried out for the investigation of offences related to the performance of armed bands or terrorist elements and there are reasonable reasons to make the measure provided for in the paragraphs necessary The Minister of the Interior may be ordered by the Minister of the Interior or, failing that, the Secretary of State for Security. This measure shall be communicated immediately to the competent judge and, in any event, within the maximum period of 24 hours, stating the reasons for the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the manner in which it was carried out and its result. The competent judge shall also, in a reasoned manner, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum of seventy-two hours after the measure has been ordered.

Article 588 ter e. Duty of collaboration.

1. All providers of telecommunications services, access to a telecommunications network or information society services, as well as any person who in any way contributes to facilitating communications through the telephone or any other means or system of telematic communication, logical or virtual, they are obliged to lend to the judge, the Fiscal Ministry and the agents of the Judicial Police appointed for the practice of the measure the assistance and collaboration precise to facilitate the performance of the telecommunications intervention cars.

2. The subjects required to provide collaboration will have the obligation to keep secret about the activities required by the authorities.

3. Those bound by the previous duties may incur a crime of disobedience.

Article 588 ter f. Control of the measure.

In compliance with the provisions of Article 588 bis g, the Judicial Police shall make available to the judge, with the periodicity determined by him and on different digital media, the transcription of the passages he considers to be interest and the integrated recordings made. The origin and destination of each of them shall be indicated and shall be ensured by means of an advanced electronic sealing or signature system or sufficiently reliable warning system, the authenticity and integrity of the information flown from the computer central to the digital media in which the communications would have been recorded.

Article 588 ter g. Duration.

The initial maximum duration of the intervention, which shall be computed from the date of the judicial authorisation, shall be three months, extendable for successive periods of equal duration up to the maximum period of eighteen months.

Article 588 ter h. Request for extension.

In order to substantiate the request for the extension, the Judicial Police will provide, if necessary, the transcript of those passages of the conversations from which relevant information is derived to decide on the maintenance of the measure.

Before issuing the resolution, the judge may request clarification or further information, including the full content of the intervened conversations.

Article 588 ter i. Access of the parts to the recordings.

1. The secret and expired the validity of the intervention measure, will be given to the parts copies of the recordings and the transcriptions made. If the recording of data refers to aspects of the intimate life of the persons, only the recording and transcription of those parts that do not refer to them will be delivered. The non-inclusion of the entire recording in the submitted transcript shall be stated in an express manner.

2. Once the recordings have been examined and within the time limit set by the judge, in the light of the volume of the information contained in the media, either party may request the inclusion in the copies of those communications which it understands relevant and have been excluded. The judge of instruction, heard or examined in case of such communications, shall decide on its exclusion or incorporation into the cause.

3. The investigating judge shall notify the persons involved in the intercepted communications of the practice of interference and shall be informed of the specific communications in which they have participated which are affected, Unless it is impossible, it requires a disproportionate effort or may prejudice future investigations. If the notified person so requests, a copy of the recording or transcript of such communications shall be provided to him, in so far as this does not affect the right to privacy of other persons or is contrary to the purposes of the process in which he/she is has adopted the measure of interference.

Section 2. Incorporation to the process of electronic traffic data or associates

Article 588 ter j. Worker data in automated files for service providers.

1. Electronic data retained by service providers or persons providing communication in compliance with the legislation on data retention relating to electronic communications or on its own initiative for reasons commercial or other and that they are connected to communication processes, they can only be transferred for incorporation to the process with judicial authorization.

2. Where the knowledge of such data is essential for the investigation, the competent judge shall be required to obtain the information contained in the automated files of the service providers, including the search cross-linked or intelligent data, provided that the nature of the data to be known and the reasons for the transfer are specified.

Section 3. Access to data required for the identification of users, terminals, and connectivity devices

Article 588 ter k. IP number identification.

When in the exercise of the functions of prevention and discovery of crimes committed on the Internet, the agents of the Judicial Police have access to an IP address that is being used for the commission crime and shall not include the identification and location of the equipment or the corresponding connectivity device or the personal identification data of the user, shall request the investigating judge to require the agents subject to the duty of collaboration under Article 588 b e, the transfer of data enabling identification and location of the terminal or connectivity device and the identification of the suspect.

Article 588 ter l. Identification of terminals by means of identification codes of the apparatus or its components.

1. Provided that in the course of an investigation it would not have been possible to obtain a certain number of subscribers and this is indispensable for the purposes of the investigation, the agents of the Judicial Police will be able to use technical devices that allow access to the knowledge of the identification codes or technical labels of the telecommunication apparatus or any of its components, such as the IMSI or IMEI numbering and, in general, of any technical means which, according to the state of the technology is suitable for identifying the communication equipment used or the card used to access the telecommunications network.

2. Once the codes permitting the identification of the apparatus or any of its components have been obtained, the agents of the Judicial Police may request from the competent judge the intervention of the communications in the terms established in the Article 588 ter d. The application shall bring to the attention of the court the use of the devices referred to in the previous paragraph.

The court shall give a reasoned decision granting or denying the application for intervention within the time limit laid down in Article 588 (c

.

Article 588 ter m. Identification of holders or terminals or connectivity devices.

When, in the exercise of their duties, the Prosecutor's Office or the Judicial Police need to know the ownership of a telephone number or any other means of communication, or, in the opposite direction, the number of telephone or data identifying any means of communication, may be addressed directly to providers of telecommunications services, access to a telecommunications network or information society services, who, will be required to comply with the requirement, under the warning of incurring the crime of disobedience. "

Fifteen. A new Chapter VI with the following heading and content is incorporated in Title VIII of Book II:

" CHAPTER VI

Fetching and recording oral communications by using electronic devices

Article 588 quater a. Recording of direct oral communications.

1. The placing and use of electronic devices enabling the collection and recording of direct oral communications to be maintained by the person under investigation, on the public road or in another open space, at his or her home or in the any other closed locations.

The listening and recording devices may be placed both on the outside and inside the home or closed place.

2. In the case where the entry into the home or in any of the spaces for the exercise of privacy is necessary, the enabling resolution shall extend its motivation to the source of access to such places.

3. The listening and recording of the private conversations may be supplemented by the obtaining of images when expressly authorized by the court decision that agrees with it.

Article 588 quater b. Budgets.

1. The use of the devices referred to in the previous Article must be linked to communications which may take place in one or more specific meetings of the investigation with other persons and on whose predictability there are indications highlighted by the investigation.

2. It may only be authorised when the following requirements are met:

a) That the facts that are being investigated are the constitutive of any of the following crimes:

1. Criminal offences punishable by a maximum penalty of at least three years in prison.

2. º Crimes committed within a group or criminal organization.

3. Terrorism Crimes.

b) That it can rationally be expected that the use of the devices will provide essential data and evidential relevance for the clarification of the facts and the identification of its author.

Article 588 quater c. Content of the judgment.

The judicial decision authorizing the measure must contain, in addition to the requirements laid down in Article 588 bis (c), a specific reference to the place or dependencies, as well as to the meetings of the investigation which will be subject to surveillance.

Article 588 quater d. Control of the measure.

In compliance with the provisions of Article 588 bis g, the Judicial Police shall make available to the judicial authority the original support or authentic electronic copy of the recordings and images, which shall be accompanied by a transcript of the conversations you consider to be of interest.

The report will identify all the agents who have participated in the execution and follow-up of the measure.

Article 588 quater e. Eesc.

Cesada the measure for any of the causes provided for in article 588 bis j, the recording of conversations that may take place in other encounters or the collection of images of such moments will require a new authorization judicial. "

Sixteen. A new Chapter VII with the following heading and content is added to Title VIII of Book II:

" CHAPTER VII

Using imaging, tracking, and localization technical devices

Article 588 quinquies a. Capturing images in places or public spaces.

1. The Judicial Police may obtain and record by any technical means images of the person under investigation when they are in a public place or space, if necessary to facilitate their identification, to locate the instruments or effects of the crime or obtain relevant facts for the clarification of the facts.

2. The measure may be carried out even if it affects persons other than the person under investigation, provided that the usefulness of the surveillance is otherwise significantly reduced or there are reasonable indications of the relationship of such persons to the investigated and the facts which are the subject of the investigation.

Article 588 quinquies b. Use of devices or technical means of tracking and tracing.

1. Where there are reasons of need and the measure is proportionate, the competent judge may authorise the use of devices or technical means of tracking and tracing.

2. The authorization must specify the technical means to be used.

3. The providers, agents and persons referred to in Article 588 b are obliged to provide the judge, the Prosecutor's Office and the judicial police officers appointed for the practice of the measure with the necessary assistance and collaboration. to facilitate compliance with the orders for which the monitoring is ordered, under the warning of an offence of disobedience.

4. Where there are grounds for urgency which make it reasonably feared that the device or technical means of tracking and tracing will not be immediately put in place, the investigation shall be thwarted, the Judicial Police may proceed with their placement, giving It shall, as soon as possible, and in any case within the maximum of 24 hours, be granted to the judicial authority, who may ratify the measure adopted or agree to its immediate cessation within the same period. In the latter case, the information obtained from the device placed shall be devoid of effects in the process.

Article 588 quinquies c. Duration of the measure.

1. The measure for the use of technical monitoring and tracing devices provided for in the previous Article shall be for a maximum of three months from the date of their authorisation. By way of exception, the judge may agree to carry out successive extensions for the same or shorter period up to a maximum of eighteen months, if justified in the light of the results obtained with the measure.

2. The Judicial Police shall provide the judge with the original media or authentic electronic copies containing the information collected when requested and, in any case, when the investigations are completed.

3. The information obtained through the technical monitoring and tracing devices referred to in the preceding Articles shall be duly guarded to avoid undue use. "

seventeen. A new Chapter VIII is set out in Title III of Book II with the following heading and content:

" CHAPTER VIII

Recording of bulk storage devices

Article 588 sexies a. Need for individualized motivation.

1. Where the apprehension of computers, telephone or telematic communication instruments or devices for the mass storage of digital information or access to repositories is likely to be the case for the practice of a home-register The decision of the investigating judge shall extend its reasoning to the justification, where appropriate, of the reasons which legitimize the access of the agents empowered to the information contained in such devices.

2. The mere seizure of any of the devices referred to in the preceding paragraph, carried out during the course of the house registration procedure, does not legitimate the access to its content, without prejudice to the possibility of such access be subsequently authorised by the competent judge.

Article 588 sexies b. Access to information on electronic devices seized outside the home of the investigation.

The requirement provided for in paragraph 1 of the previous Article shall also apply to cases where computers, communication tools or mass storage devices, or access to repositories Data telematics, whether they are apprehended independently of a home registry. In such cases, the agents shall inform the judge of the seizure of such effects. If the latter considers access to the information contained in its contents indispensable, it shall grant the relevant authorisation.

Article 588 sexies c. Judicial authorization.

1. The decision of the investigating judge authorising access to the information contained in the devices referred to in this Section shall set out the terms and scope of the register and may authorise the making of copies of the computer data. It shall also lay down the conditions necessary to ensure the integrity of the data and the guarantees of its preservation in order to enable, where appropriate, the practice of an expert opinion.

2. Unless they constitute the object or instrument of the offence or there are other reasons to justify it, the seizure of the physical media containing the data or information files shall be prevented, where this can cause serious injury to the owner or owner and it is possible to obtain a copy of them under conditions that guarantee the authenticity and integrity of the data.

3. Where those who carry out the registration or have access to the information system or a part of it in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter have reasonable grounds to consider that the data sought is stored on another system (a) a computer or a part of it may extend the registration, provided that the data are lawfully accessible through the initial system or are available to it. This extension of the registration must be authorised by the judge, unless it has already been in the initial authorisation. In case of urgency, the Judicial Police or the prosecutor may carry out the procedure, informing the judge immediately, and in any case within the maximum period of twenty-four hours, of the action taken, the manner in which it has been carried out and its result. The competent judge shall also, in a reasoned manner, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum of seventy-two hours after the interception has been ordered.

4. In cases of urgency in which a legitimate constitutional interest is appreciated that makes the measure provided for in the previous paragraphs of this article indispensable, the Judicial Police will be able to carry out the direct examination of the data contained in the the device seized, communicating it immediately, and in any event within the maximum period of 24 hours, in writing to the competent court, stating the reasons for the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the the way in which it was carried out and its result. The competent judge shall also, in a reasoned manner, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum of 72 hours after the measure has been ordered.

5. The authorities and agents responsible for the investigation may order any person who is aware of the operation of the computer system or the measures applied to protect the computer data contained in the computer system to facilitate the information that is necessary, provided that it does not lead to a disproportionate burden on the affected person, under the warning of a crime of disobedience.

This provision shall not be applicable to the investigation or damage to persons who are exempt from the obligation to declare on account of parentage and to those who, in accordance with Article 416.2, cannot declare in virtue of professional secrecy. "

Eighteen. A new Chapter IX is incorporated in Title VIII of Book II, with the following heading and content:

" CHAPTER IX

Remote records about computer equipment

Article 588 septies a. Budgets.

1. The competent judge may authorise the use of identification and code data, as well as the installation of a software, which allows remote and remote examination of the remote and non-knowledge of the holder or user of the content of the software. a computer, electronic device, computer system, instrument of mass storage of computer data or database, provided that it pursues the investigation of any of the following offences:

a) Crimes committed within criminal organizations.

b) Crimes of terrorism.

(c) Crimes against minors or persons with a judicially modified capacity.

d) Crimes against the Constitution, treason and relative to national defense.

e) Crimes committed through computer tools or any other information technology or telecommunication or communication service.

2. The judicial decision authorising the registration shall specify:

(a) Computers, electronic devices, computer systems or part thereof, data storage media or databases, data or other digital content that is the object of the measure.

b) The scope of the same, the way in which access and apprehension of the data or computer files relevant to the cause and the software by which the control of the information will be executed.

c) The authorized agents for the execution of the measure.

d) The authorization, if any, for the realization and preservation of copies of the computer data.

e) The precise measures for preserving the integrity of the stored data, as well as for the inaccessibility or deletion of such data from the computer system to which access has been accessed.

3. Where the agents carrying out the remote registration have reason to believe that the data sought is stored in another computer system or part thereof, they shall make this known to the judge, who may authorise a extending the terms of the record.

Article 588 septies b. Duty of collaboration.

1. The service providers and persons referred to in Article 588 b and the holders or persons responsible for the computer system or database which are the subject of the register are obliged to provide the investigators with the necessary cooperation for the practice of the measure and access to the system. They are also required to provide the necessary assistance so that the data and information collected can be examined and displayed.

2. The authorities and agents responsible for the investigation may order any person who is aware of the operation of the computer system or the measures applied to protect the computer data contained therein to facilitate the operation of the information system. information that is necessary for the good end of diligence.

This provision shall not be applicable to the investigation or damage to persons who are exempt from the obligation to declare on the grounds of parentage, and to those who, in accordance with Article 416.2, cannot declare in virtue of professional secrecy.

3. The subjects required to provide collaboration will have the obligation to keep secret about the activities required by the authorities.

4. The subjects referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall be subject to the responsibility laid down in Article 588 (3) and (

).

Article 588 septies c. Duration.

The measure will have a maximum duration of one month, extendable for equal periods up to a maximum of three months. "

nineteen. A new Chapter X with the following heading and content is created in Title VIII of Book II:

" CHAPTER X

Assurance measures

Article 588 octies. Data retention order.

The Prosecutor's Office or the Judicial Police may require any natural or legal person to preserve and protect data or specific information included in a computer storage system that is their disposal until the relevant judicial authorisation is obtained for their disposal in accordance with the provisions of the preceding Articles.

Data will be retained for a maximum period of ninety days, renewable once until the assignment is authorized or one hundred and eighty days.

The required person shall be required to cooperate and to keep secret of the development of this diligence, subject to the responsibility described in paragraph 3 of Article 588 ter e. "

Twenty. Article 967 (1) is amended as follows:

" 1. In the summons to the complainant, to the offended or injured person and to the investigation for the trial, they will be informed that they can be assisted by a lawyer if they wish and that they will have to go to the trial with the means of proof of trying to fend off. The citation of the investigation shall be accompanied by a copy of the complaint or the complaint that has been filed.

Without prejudice to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, for the prosecution of minor offences punishable by a penalty of a fine of at least six months, the general rules of defence shall apply. representation. "

Twenty-one. Replacing terms.

1. In Articles 120, 309 bis, 760, 771, 775, 779, 797 and 798, the 'imputed' noun is replaced by 'investigated', in singular or plural as appropriate.

2. In Articles 325, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 508, 511, 529, 530, 539, 544 ter, 764, 765, 766 and 773, the "imputed" noun is replaced by "investigated or indicted", in singular or plural as appropriate.

3. In Article 141, the words 'imputed or processed' are replaced by 'investigated or prosecuted'.

4. In Articles 762, 780 and 784, the "imputed" noun is replaced by "engorged", in singular or plural as appropriate.

5. In Articles 503 and 797 the adjective 'imputed' is replaced by 'investigated'.

Additional disposition first. Cost forecasting.

The measures included in this rule may not result in an increase in staff, remuneration or other personnel costs.

Additional provision second. Replacing references.

The provisions contained in other legal texts relating to the intervention of the telephone or telematic communications provided for in Article 579 of the Law on Criminal Procedure shall be made by reference to the provided in Title VIII of Book II of that law.

Single transient arrangement. Applicable legislation.

1. This law shall apply to criminal proceedings initiated after its entry into force.

2. The law will also apply to law enforcement and prosecution, decisions and legal proceedings to be agreed upon entry into force in criminal proceedings.

Single repeal provision. Repeal of rules.

Articles 387 and 395 of the Criminal Procedure Act are repealed, as well as how many provisions are contrary to the provisions of this law.

Final disposition first. Amendment of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judiciary.

Articles 57.1, 65, 73.3, 82.1, 87.1, 87b are amended.  1 and 89 bis.  2 and 3 of the Organic Law 6/1985, of July 1, of the Judiciary, which are worded as follows:

One. A new numeral 5. to Article 57 (1) is added.

"5. Of the autonomous confiscation procedures for crimes for which they are competent."

Two. A new numeral 7. º is added to item 65, which replaces the current one that becomes the numeral 8. º:

" 7. Of the autonomous confiscation procedures for crimes for which they are competent.

8. Of any other matter that is attributed to you by the laws. "

Three. A new point (e) is added to Article 73 (3), with the following wording:

"(e) Of the autonomous confiscation procedures for the offences for which they are competent."

Four. The second paragraph of the numeral 2 is amended and a new numeral 6. to Article 82 (1) is added, which shall be as follows:

" 2. of the resources established by the law against the resolutions handed down by the Courts of Instruction and the Criminal of the Province.

For the knowledge of the appeals against resolutions of the Courts of Instruction in light crimes the Hearing will be constituted with a single Magistrate, by means of a delivery shift. "

"6. Of the autonomous confiscation procedures for crimes for which they are competent."

Five. Point (b) is amended and a new point (h) is added to Article 87 (1), which shall be as follows:

"(b) It is also for them to give judgment in accordance with the indictment in the cases established by the Law and in the processes by acceptance of decree."

"(h) of the autonomous confiscation procedures for the offences for which they are competent."

Six. Paragraph 2 of Article 89a is amended as follows:

" 2. The Criminal Courts will prosecute the causes for crime that the law determines.

In order to facilitate the knowledge of the matters instructed by the Courts of Violence on Women, and taking into account the number of existing cases, one or more Courts must be specialized in each province, according to the as provided for in Article 98 of this Law.

It is also for the Courts of the Criminal Court to execute the sentences handed down in cases of serious or less serious crime by the Courts of Instruction, the recognition and enforcement of the resolutions imposing sanctions pecuniary charges transmitted by the competent authorities of other Member States of the European Union, where they are to be complied with on Spanish territory, and the procedures for the autonomous confiscation of offences for which they are known to be competent. "

Seven. Paragraph 3 of Article 89a is amended as follows:

" 3. In the Villa of Madrid, with jurisdiction throughout Spain, there will be one or more Central Criminal Courts who will know, in cases where the laws of procedure establish, the causes for the crimes referred to in Article 65 and the other matters to which the laws are addressed.

It is also for the Central Criminal Courts to execute the sentences handed down in cases of serious or less serious crime by the Central Courts of Instruction, and the procedures for the autonomous confiscation by the courts. offences for which they are competent. "

Final disposition second. Competence title.

This law is dictated by the jurisdiction that the State exclusively attributes to Article 149.1.6. of the Spanish Constitution in the field of procedural law.

The first provision is made under the exclusive powers of Article 149.1.5. of the Spanish Constitution on the administration of justice.

Final disposition third. Incorporation of European Union law.

This law incorporates into Spanish law Directive 2013 /48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right to legal assistance in criminal proceedings and proceedings concerning the European arrest warrant, and on the right to a third party being informed at the time of the deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third parties and with consular authorities during the deprivation of liberty.

Final disposition fourth. Entry into force.

This law shall enter into force within two months of its publication in the "Official Gazette of the State", with the exception of paragraphs one, three, four, five and six of the single article which shall do so on 1 November 2015.

Therefore,

I command all Spaniards, individuals and authorities, to keep and keep this organic law.

Madrid, 5 October 2015.

FELIPE R.

The President of the Government,

MARIANO RAJOY BREY