Organic Law 13/2015, Of 5 October, Amending The Criminal Procedure Act To Strengthen Procedural Safeguards And Regulation Of Technological Research Measures.

Original Language Title: Ley Orgánica 13/2015, de 5 de octubre, de modificación de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal para el fortalecimiento de las garantías procesales y la regulación de las medidas de investigación tecnológica.

Read the untranslated law here: http://www.boe.es/buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-2015-10725

FELIPE VI


KING OF SPAIN
To all who see and hear.

Know: that the Parliament has approved and I hereby sanction the following organic law:
PREAMBLE


I

The proposed Criminal Procedure Code by the Institutional Commission for the preparation of a text articulated Criminal Procedure Act, constituted by the Council of Ministers Agreement of March 2, 2012, currently subject to public information and debate raises a radical change in the criminal justice system whose implementation requires a broad consensus. While the debate is held in trust to find the best possible concert on the new criminal procedure model, it needs to be addressed immediately certain issues that can not wait to be resolved with the promulgation of the new regulatory text to replace the more than centennial Criminal Procedure Act.

Those issues include strengthening of procedural rights in accordance with the requirements of European Union law and regulation measures technological research in the field of the rights to privacy, confidentiality of communications and 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, introducing legal, substantive and procedural changes, which affect the proper scope of the organic law, as it develops fundamental rights and public freedoms set forth in this constitutional provision.

Throughout all these years there has not been a common approach that would serve as basis for determining what content the Criminal Procedure Act should be subject to the reservation of organic law, differentiating them from those whose regulation should be carried out by ordinary law. In many cases, procedural requirements were high rank: sometimes under which the Constitutional Court has called "related matters", ie, those "that attention to reasons thematic connection or systematic or good legislative policy consider appropriate to include with matters reserved to the organic law "(STC 5/1981); in others, affect laws must specifically be organic in nature, as is the case of the Organic Law of Judicial Power or the Criminal Code.

What is more, it can not be denied that the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court on the legal development of certain fundamental rights and the delimitation of its essential content has varied over the years with unavoidable impact on those regulations, by its contents should be included in the reservation of Article 81.1 of the Constitution.

The reform of the Criminal Procedure Act now drives includes measures that develop fundamental rights and other strictly procedural nature. Since the latter are not strictly speaking a necessary complement of organic matter, it is considered preferable to be dealt with through separate standards of different rank.

Therefore, it was decided that the legislative initiative that focuses on predictions of an organic nature, such as occupying this law (strengthening the procedural rights of defendants and detainees or prisoners, and regulation measures limiting research of Article 18 of the Constitution), are regulated in an ad hoc standard organic range.


III
It is necessary to transpose into domestic law Directive 2013/48 / EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right to assistance of counsel in criminal proceedings and procedures relating to the EAW, and the right to report to a third party at the time of deprivation of liberty and to communicate with others and with consular authorities during the detention. To do Articles 118, 509, 520 and 527 are modified and a new Article 520 ter in the Criminal Procedure Act with the introduction of the provisions that the European Union law requires, among which the assistance scheme is introduced attorney the detainee.


The right to counsel in criminal proceedings, the right to be informed of the deprivation of liberty to a third party and the right to communicate with consular authorities and third parties during the deprivation of liberty are based on the provisions of articles 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to the interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights. The amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act will facilitate the implementation of these rights, guaranteeing fundamental aspects of defense in criminal proceedings.

For this reason, the current Article 118 of the Criminal Procedure Act, in which the right of defense is regulated, recognized and clearly states that any person to whom the commission of an offense is attributed amending , you may exercise their right of defense, without restrictions other than those provided for in the law, setting as time frame for the exercise of this right from the attribution of the offense investigated to the very extinction of the penalty. It is essential content of the right to defense the assistance of counsel may be appointed or, failing that, a lawyer, with which you can communicate and meet privately at any time since attributed the realization of an offense and which will be present in all his statements and in few errands recognition, confrontation or reconstruction actually practice.

Special mention should be the question of the recognition of confidentiality of communications between the investigated or accused and his lawyer, who may be limited in certain defined circumstances, such as the presence of objective evidence of the involvement of counsel in the criminal act investigated.

All rights investigated or prosecuted shall be provided in understandable and tailored to the personal circumstances of the target language, taking into account the age, maturity or disability.

When it comes to people who have been arrested or detained, these rights are contained in Article 520 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which rigorously adapts to the demands of European legislation, making specific mention, among others, the detainee's right to appoint a lawyer with whom he will meet privately, even before he received statement by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority. In the event that, due to the geographical distance, not the immediate assistance of counsel possible, be provided to detained telephone or videoconference with that, unless such communication is impossible. the right to inform a relative deprivation of liberty, the right to communicate by telephone with a third party of their choice and the right to communicate with consular authorities in the case of foreign prisoners detained or is also regulated.

In this provision, in order to complete the investigation detainee's status, the requirement that the police report reflects the place and time of the arrest and bringing to justice or freedom is established. In order to ensure the constitutional rights to honor, privacy and image of the detainee, following the doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights which requires that detention is respectful of human dignity and does not pose a greater burden than itself It involves the arrest itself, has been the legal text the requirement that those who agree and those in charge of practice, to ensure those rights, as indeed already reminded instructions of the Attorney General and the Ministry of the Interior. Such protection can not lose sight, however, respect the fundamental right to information, under the terms established in Article 20 of the Constitution and according to the doctrine of the Constitutional Court, as a manifestation of the rule of law.

The so-called "solitary confinement" has also been reviewed in this reform in order to adapt to the demands of European Union law. The new regulation Article 527 can apply this form of detention when presenting the budget legally established according to the new wording of Article 509. In addition, the judge is empowered to limit certain rights according to the needs of each case, without this restriction automatically and indifferently on all, and for the time strictly necessary to operate.


With regard to minors, the fact and place of custody shall be communicated as soon as possible to exercise parental authority, guardianship or custody of fact those, and will be made available to the Sections of Minors prosecution. If there is a conflict of interest between minors and those exercising parental authority, guardianship or custody of homeland fact, you will appoint a guardian ad litem who will be supplied that information.

For people with judicially modified capacity, it informs those exercising guardianship or custody of fact those, and will realize that the public prosecutor.
You
Finally, a specific rule is introduced to the arrests in marine areas away from the Spanish territory, responding to situations that came to occur in the absence of legal provision for such cases.
IV


The Criminal Procedure Act has failed to escape over time. Renewed forms of crime linked to the use of new technologies have revealed the inadequacy of a regulatory framework designed to very different times. Information flows generated by telematic communication systems warn of the possibilities that are available to the offender, but also provide powerful research tools to public authorities. Thus arises the need to find a delicate balance between the state's ability to deal with a criminal phenomenology of greenfield and space exclusion our constitutional system guarantees every citizen against third parties. No matter how meritorious it has been the effort of judges and courts to define the limits of the state in the investigation of crime, abandonment to the jurisprudential creation of what must be the subject of legislative regulation has led to a deficit in the democratic quality of our procedural system, lack both dogmatic and supranational bodies have remembered. Recently, the Constitutional Court has pointed to the urgent nature of regulation that addresses the interference with privacy investigation in criminal proceedings. Today, lack coverage and remedies can not be obtained by going to a voluntarist record analog integration that goes beyond the limits of what is constitutionally acceptable. Only in this way can avoid the negative impact that the current state of affairs is planning on some of the constitutional rights that may be subject to limitation in criminal proceedings.

The arrest and opening of written and telegraphic correspondence is updated in a new Article 579, where your application material area is bounded, while the maximum term and exceptions to the need for judicial authorization regulated according to settled case law. In particular and as the first of the highlights, reform opts compared to other compared models that are home to a casuistry enumeration of crimes authorizing this means of research, by requiring the concurrence, not cumulative, any of the three requirements as defined in paragraph 1 of this article and serve as a reference for setting the scope of other investigative measures. The first operates as a generic limitation, quantitative, linked to the severity of the penalty: intentional offenses carrying a punishment with more than three years in prison ceiling. Along with this budget are added two others: being in the presence of crimes committed within a group or criminal organization, or dealing with terrorist offenses. A new article is introduced 579 bis on the use of the result of this diligence in another criminal proceedings, particularly in the treatment of so-called "incidental findings" and the continuation of the measure, that other process, for what a new court order to validate this situation is required. This forecast shall serve as a guideline for other measures of technological research.

Other technological research measures are the subject of attention in Chapters V to VII of Title VIII of Book II of the Criminal Procedure Act, and all of them are applicable common provisions introduced in Chapter IV. It has rearranged the traditional systematics of that title in order to accommodate the urgent regulation of this matter. Thus it fails a formal historical scheme that despite the practical problems arising from obsolescence, has the advantage of being the object of frequent attention from the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.


It has been estimated regulatory timely proclamation of the principles that the Constitutional Court has defined as determining the validity of acts of interference. Any measure should respond to the specialty. This requires that the action in question intended to clarify a particular offense, as prohibiting measures technological research prospective in nature, according to the concept that informs the issued doctrine of ultimate interpreter of the Constitution, for all judgment 253/2006 of 11 September. Measures technological research must also satisfy the principles of adequacy, exceptionality, necessity and proportionality, whose concurrence must be sufficiently justified in enabling court decision where the judge will determine the nature and extent of the measure in relation to the concrete research and the expected results.

The reform has seen fit not to abandon the formal aspects of the application and content of the enabling judicial decision. Forensic practice is no stranger to cases of police requests and subsequent judgments which suffer a laconic argument might violate the constitutional duty to state reasons. To avoid this effect the thorough regulation of the content of that application is directed, and the court decision, if necessary, enable the measurement of interference. Common provisions shall also extend to other formal matters, such as the request for extension, the general rules of life, secrecy, measurement control, involvement of third parties, the use of information in different procedure, the cessation of the measure or destruction of records. Each diligence modulate some of these issues and be governed by specific rules specific to its own particularity.

In connection with the interception of telephone and telematic communications, in determining the material scope, the same approach is followed as evidenced above by reference, but add to the list of offenses committed by means of instruments computer or any other information technology or telecommunications.

In the new regulation itself substantivity is conferred to other forms of telematic communication that have lacked regulatory treatment in procedural law. The difficulties associated with that gap have been multiplied in practice by a judicial interpretation of legislation called to regulate the obligation for operators to retain data generated by electronic communications, which has degraded widespread telematic communication tools -for example, SMS messages or email-to the status of aspects accessories, mandatory sacrifice whenever a judicial decision is taken wiretap. Faced with this conception, the new text authorizes the operation and registration of communications of any kind that are made over the telephone or any other means or telematics system, logical or virtual communication. But leaves the interception of all-in its own distinct instrumentality to the general principles that the text proclaims. It is thereby intended to be the judge himself, pondering the seriousness of being under investigation, which determine the extent of state interference in private communications. The enabling resolution therefore shall specify the objective and subjective scope of the measure. That is, will have to motivate, in the light of those principles, if the sacrifice of telephone communications is not enough and if the research also requires the interception of SMS, MMS or any other form of telematic communication bidirectional character.

A period of three months set as maximum initial duration, a period which is capable of expansion and extension, reasoned request for successive periods of equal duration intervention, up to a maximum of eighteen months time, as long as the causes that led to that. Thus a balance between the need to rely on these steps to the investigation of the most serious threats to society crimes and the importance of defining time-bound not to prolong unnecessarily the interference of public authorities in the privacy of sought 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 system or electronic signature which guarantees dump information from the central system is imposed. This measure is parallel to that required in other jurisdictional orders for the full validity of the documents to process electronically and hosts a jurisprudential line of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court.

Regulation is completed with a provision intended to set the terms of erasure and disposal of the original recordings, once the procedure has been terminated. The aim is to avoid dissemination of material which, by their very nature could damage irreparably the privacy of the victim.

In the investigation of some crimes, the incorporation process electronic traffic or associated data can be of decisive importance. The reform welcomes the criterion set by Law 25/2007 of October 18, for retaining data relating to electronic communications and public communications networks, and imposes the requirement for judicial authorization for assignment to authorized agents, always which is data related to communication processes. Their incorporation into the process is allowed only in the case of the investigation of a crime that, for reasons linked to the principle of proportionality, whether that justify the sacrifice of the inviolability of communications. an individualized treatment is given legal access by police to IMSI, IMEI, IP address and other identifying elements of a particular card or terminal, in line with a Supreme Court case law already established on this subject. the course of the transfer of data unrelated to communication processes concerning ownership or identification of an electronic device, which can access the public prosecutor or the judicial police in the performance of their duties without judicial authorization also regulates .

Experience shows that, in the investigation of certain crimes, capture and recording of oral communications open through the use of electronic devices may be indispensable. It is a subject so far absent from the regulation of criminal proceedings and whose scope is subject addresses two key ideas. The first is the requirement that the investigating judge which legitimizes the act of interference; the second, the need for the governing specialty, exceptionality, suitability, necessity and proportionality principles act as elements justifying the measure. This measure may be granted only for specific meetings that will keep the investigation, having to accurately identify the place or premises under surveillance. Therefore, do not fit authorizations collection and recording of oral discussions of general or indiscriminate character, and consequently, the listening device and, if necessary, the cameras associated with it should be disabled as soon end the conversation whose capture was permitted, as is clear from Article 588 quater c.

The reform also addresses the regulation of the use of technical devices tracking and tracing. The incidence in the privacy of any person may have knowledge by the public authorities of their spatial location, it makes the authorization to practice is attributed to the investigating judge. In the same chapter the image recording is enabled in public space without judicial authorization, to the extent that no impairment occurs to any of the fundamental rights under Article 18 of our Constitution.

The law aims to end another regulatory vacuum. This is the registration of computer mass storage devices and remote logging equipment. Regarding the first, the reform eliminates any doubt that these instruments of communication and, where appropriate, information storage are more than just pieces of evidence. Hence the stringent regulations regarding access to its content. Thus affecting remote registry -diligencia already present in many of the europeas- legislation, the intense degree of interference involving adoption justifies even the objective of the measure is strengthened field, for what have been limited to a list numerus clausus crimes that can be enabled, since the time duration is limited, having been chosen for a period of one month maximum for extended periods of time equal to three months.


Finally and with regard to measures of technological research, the reform envisages as a security measure order data retention, which aims to ensure the preservation of data and specific information of any kind that are stored in a computer system until the appropriate judicial authority for assignment is obtained. Thus subsequent contribution as evidence or, where appropriate, forensic analysis will not be frustrated by the disappearance, alteration or deterioration of some inherently volatile elements. This standard draws on Article 16 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001, ratified by Spain on May 20, 2010, and a maximum term of the order of ninety days and be extended set until authorized the assignment or one hundred and eighty days are met.

It is idle to explain the importance of so-called undercover for the purposes of prosecution of certain crimes such agent. Well, closely related to the above measures of technological research, reform updates the use of such resources by the covert on the tasks entrusted agent. Specifically, on the one hand it provides for the possibility of undercover agents to obtain images and record conversations, provided specifically collected a judicial permission; and another, the figure of computer undercover agent, which requires judicial authorization to act in close communication channels (as in the open, by its very nature, channels is not necessary) is regulated and which in turn, will require an authorization special (either in the same judgment, with separate and sufficient motivation, it is a different one) to exchange files or send illegal because of their content in the course of an investigation.
V


The reform also aims to adapt the language of the Code of Criminal Procedure to modern times and, in particular, to eliminate certain expressions used indiscriminately in the law, without any conceptual rigor, such as accused, with It alluded to the person on whom fall just mere suspicion and it is investigated, but for which there is insufficient evidence for that is attributed court and formally committing an offense. To this end the Commission for the clarity of legal language was convened, whose recommendations were taken into account in the drafting of the provisions of this law. Among its conclusions is the need to avoid the negative connotations and stigmatizing of that expression, accommodating language to the reality of what happens in each of the stages of criminal proceedings, reasons must lead to the replacement of the accused word for other more appropriate, as they are investigated and prosecuted, according to the procedural stage. The reform has endorsed these conclusions. And so the first of these terms serve to identify the person under investigation for his relationship with a crime; while the defendant will be appointed term, generally, to him whom the judicial authority, once the investigation of the case, formally accused having participated in the commission of a particular crime. Notwithstanding that over this law it has already proceeded in accordance with such conceptual and terminological adjustment in paragraph twenty timely replacement of the terms mentioned with respect to the rest of the articles of the Criminal Procedure Act is performed. In any case, this substitution does not affect other nomenclatures used to define the investigated or prosecuted for their relationship with the procedural situation in which it is located. Thus, the terms "accused" or "processing" which may be used interchangeably to that of 'indicted' in the appropriate phases are maintained.
VI


The rules provided in this Act shall apply to all criminal proceedings instituted after its entry into force. However and so that the guarantees provided concerning the status of the investigation and arrested and measures of technological research, are immediately operational in the ongoing proceedings, provides that such guarantees also preside police and tax proceedings, resolutions and prosecutions They agreed after its entry into force. This will mean in any way that may question the validity of the resolutions adopted or proceedings taken before and under the law then in force.

Sole Article. Amendment of Criminal Procedure Act.

The Criminal Procedure Act is amended as follows:


One. Article 118, which shall read as follows amendments:

"Article 118.

1. Any person to whom an offense may exercise the right of defense, intervening in the proceedings, since his report of its existence, has been subject to detention or any other precautionary measure or agreed processing, for which attributed you will be instructed, without undue delay, the following rights:

A) Right to be informed of the facts attributed to it, as well as any relevant change in the subject of the investigation and the facts alleged. This information will be provided with sufficient detail to allow the effective exercise of the right of defense.

B) The right to examine the proceedings in sufficient time to safeguard the right of defense and in any case, before you take statement.

C) The right to act in criminal proceedings to exercise their right of defense in accordance with the provisions of the law.

D) Right to freely choose their lawyer, without prejudice to paragraph 1 a) of Article 527.

E) The right to apply for legal aid, conditions and procedures for doing so to obtain it.

F) The right to free translation and interpretation in accordance with Articles 123 and 127.

G) The right to remain silent and not testify if you do not want to do it, no longer answer any or some of the questions put to them.

H) The right not to testify against himself or to confess guilt.

The information referred to in this section shall be provided in understandable language and make it accessible. For this purpose the information will be adapted to the age of the recipient, degree of maturity, disability and other personal circumstance that may arise a change in the ability to understand the scope of the information that is provided.

2. The right of defense shall be exercised without restrictions other than those expressly provided for in the law since the attribution of the offense investigated until the extinction of the penalty.

The right of defense includes legal assistance of a lawyer may be appointed or, failing that, a lawyer, with which you can communicate and meet privately, even before the statement was received by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority, without prejudice to Article 527 and will be present in all his statements and in the recognition proceedings, arraignments and reconstruction of facts.

3. To act in the process, persons under investigation must be represented by an attorney and defended by a lawyer, ex officio when designándoseles not have appointed themselves and on request, and in any case, when they had no legal capacity to do so.

If you have not appointed attorney or attorney, will be required to do so or are appointed ex officio if required, will not nominate, when the case reaches state in which the council is needed or those trying a resource that would make its action essential.

4. All communications between the investigated or prosecuted and your lawyer are confidential.

If these conversations or communications had been captured or intervened during the execution of some of the measures regulated by this law, the judge will order the removal of the recording or delivery to the recipient of the detained correspondence, noting these circumstances performances.

The provisions of the first subparagraph shall not apply when determining the existence of objective evidence of the involvement of counsel in the investigation of crime or their involvement with the investigation or defendant in the commission of another criminal offense, without subject to the provisions of the General Penitentiary Law.

5. The admission of a complaint, and any procedural actions of the resulting imputing a crime against person or certain people, be put immediately inform the allegedly responsible. "

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

'6. The judge may authorize officers of the Judicial Police to act under assumed identity in communications held in closed channels of communication in order to clarify any of the offenses to which paragraph 4 of this article or any offense referred the provided for in Article 588 ter a.


The computer undercover agent with specific authorization, you can exchange itself or send illegal files because of their content and analyze the results of the algorithms applied for the identification of such illegal files.

7. In the course of an investigation conducted by undercover agent, the judge may authorize the imaging and recording of conversations can be maintained at scheduled meetings between the agent and investigated, even when developing inside an address. "

Three. paragraphs 1 and 2 are amended and a new paragraph 4 is introduced to Article 509, which are worded as follows:

"1. The judge or tribunal may exceptionally, by reasoned resolution, incommunicado detention or prison when any of the following circumstances:

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

B) urgent need for immediate action by coroners to avoid compromising so severe criminal proceedings.

2. Solitary confinement last practice strictly necessary for urgent measures aimed at averting the dangers which the preceding paragraph refers to time. Solitary confinement may not extend beyond five days. In cases where the prison agreed to cause any offense that Article 384 bis or other crimes committed and organized manner by two or more persons, solitary confinement may be extended for a further period not exceeding five concerns days. "

"4. In no case shall be subject to incommunicado detention under sixteen years. "

Four. new wording in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of Article 520 and introduced new sections 2a, 7 and 8 in this provision, which will have the following content:

"1. The arrest and detention shall be carried out in the manner least harmful to the detainee or prisoner in his person, reputation and heritage. Those who agree to the measure and practice managers as well as subsequent transfers, ensure constitutional rights to honor, privacy and image of those, with respect for the fundamental right to freedom of information.

Preventive arrest may not last longer than is strictly necessary to carry out the investigations aimed at clarifying the facts. Within the time limits set out in this Act, and in any case within a maximum period of seventy-two hours, the detainee must be released or handed over to the judicial authorities.

Should be reflected in the crowded place and time of the arrest and the provision of judicial authority or, where appropriate, of the release.

2. Anyone arrested or detained shall be informed in writing, in simple and accessible language, in a language which he understands and immediately, of the facts attributed to it and the reasons for their deprivation of liberty and the rights will attend and especially the following:

A) The right to remain silent and not declaring if he will not, not to answer any or some of the questions put to him, or say that only declare before the judge.

B) The right not to testify against himself or to confess guilt.

C) The right to appoint a lawyer, without prejudice to paragraph 1 a) of Article 527 and to be assisted by him without undue delay. In the event that, due to the geographical distance is not immediately possible assistance of counsel, shall be provided to the detainee telephone or videoconference with that, unless such communication is impossible.

D) Right to access elements of the actions that are essential to challenge the legality of detention or imprisonment.

E) Right to be brought to the attention of the family or person you want, without undue delay, their detention and place of custody in which they are present at all times. Foreigners are entitled to the above circumstances communicated to the consular office of your country.

F) The right to communicate by telephone, without undue delay, with a third of their choice. This communication will be held in the presence of a police officer or, if necessary, the official designated by the judge or prosecutor, without prejudice to Article 527.

G) The right to be visited by the consular authorities of their country, to communicate and correspond with them.


H) Right to free assistance of an interpreter, in the case of foreigner who does not understand or speak the Castilian or the official language of the act in question, or deaf or hearing impaired people, as well as other people with language difficulties.

I) The right to be examined by a forensic doctor or legal substitute and, failing that, by the institution where you are, or any other dependent on the state or other public authorities.

J) The right to apply for legal aid, conditions and procedures for doing so to obtain it.

you will be also informed of the maximum period of detention to the provision of judicial authority and the procedure by which it can challenge the lawfulness of their detention legal.

When not available, a bill of rights in a language understood by the detainee will be informed of their rights through an interpreter as soon as possible. In this case, you must entregársele later and without undue delay, the written statement of rights in a language he understands.

In all cases, the detainee will be allowed to keep in his possession the written rights throughout the period of detention statement.

2a. The information the preceding paragraph to be provided in understandable language and make it accessible to the recipient. For this purpose the information age, maturity, disability and other personal circumstance that may derive a limited capacity to understand the scope of the information that is provided will adapt.

3. If the detainee is a foreigner, the consul of his country the fact of his arrest and place of custody shall be notified and be allowed to communicate with the consular authority. If the detainee has two or more nationalities, you can choose which consular authorities should be informed that it is deprived of liberty and who want to communicate.

4. If he is a minor, it will be made available to the juvenile units of the prosecution and the fact and place of custody to exercise parental authority, guardianship or custody in fact the same be communicated as soon as you have evidence of the minority.

In case of conflict of interests with those exercising parental authority, guardianship or custody of the minor fact, will appoint a guardian ad litem who is made aware of the fact and place of detention.

If the detainee had his modified judicial capacity, the information provided for in paragraph 2 of this Article shall be communicated to those exercising guardianship or custody in fact the same, informing the prosecutor.

If the child or modified capacity judicially detained a foreigner, the fact of detention officially notified the Consul of his country.

5. The detainee freely appoint counsel and if he does will be assisted by a lawyer. No authority or agent will made a recommendation to appoint counsel beyond inform you of your right.

The authority having custody of the detainee immediately inform the Bar Association's name designated by the detainee to assist the effects of location and transmission of professional custom or, where appropriate, will forward the request for appointment of counsel.

If the detainee has not appointed attorney, chosen or declines the request or not he be found, the Bar shall immediately appoint an attorney on duty.

The appointed lawyer will go to the detention center with the utmost urgency, always within the maximum period of three hours of receiving the request. If in this time failed to appear, the Bar shall appoint a new lawyer on duty that must appear as soon as possible and always within the period specified, subject to the requirement of disciplinary liability that may be incurred by the defaulting.

6. The assistance of counsel consist of:

A) Request, if any, to be informed of the detainee or prisoner rights set forth in paragraph 2 and to proceed, if necessary, the medical examination indicated in letter i).


B) Intervene in the proceedings of statement of the detainee, in the proceedings of recognition that it and in the reconstruction of the facts involving the detainee. The lawyer may ask the judge or officer who had carried out the procedure in which has intervened once been completed, the declaration or extension he deems appropriate, as well as the entry in the record of any incident that has taken place during their practice.

C) Inform the detainee of the consequences of the provision or denial of consent to the execution of procedures as requested.

If the detainee oppose the collection of samples by buccal swabs, in accordance with the provisions of the Organic Law 10/2007 of October 8, regulating the police database on identifiers obtained from DNA, the investigating judge at the request of the Judicial Police or the Public Prosecutor may impose the enforcement of such diligence by recourse to the indispensable minimum coercive measures, which shall be proportionate to the circumstances and respectful of their dignity.

D) meet privately with the detainee, even before he received statement by the police, the prosecutor or the judicial authority, without prejudice to Article 527.

7. Communications between the investigated or accused person and his lawyer are confidential under the same terms and with the same exceptions provided for in paragraph 4 of Article 118.

8. However, the detainee may waive the mandatory assistance of counsel if his arrest him whatever for acts that might be established solely as crimes against traffic safety, always has been provided with clear and sufficient information in simple language and comprehensible information on the content of that law and the consequences of the waiver. The detainee may revoke the waiver at any time. "

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

'Article 520 ter.

Detainees in marine areas for the alleged commission of the offenses referred to in Article 23.4.d) of the Organic Law 6/1985 of 1 July, the Judiciary, we will apply the rights recognized in the present chapter to the extent they are compatible with personal and means existing materials on board the ship or aircraft engaged in detention must be released or handed over to the competent judicial authority as soon as possible, without exceeding the maximum period seventy-two hours. The bringing to justice may be made by electronic means of providing for the ship or aircraft, when by reason of distance or their isolation is not possible to bring the detainees to physical presence of the judicial authority within the said period. "

Six. Article 527, which will be modified as follows:

"1. In the cases of Article 509, the detainee may be deprived of these rights if justified the circumstances:

A) Designate a lawyer of his choice.

B) Communicate with all or some of the people entitled to do so, except with the judicial authorities, the prosecution and the Coroner.

C) interview with his lawyer.

D) Get him or his lawyer to the proceedings, except to the essential elements to challenge the legality of detention.

2. Solitary confinement or restriction of other right of the preceding paragraph shall be agreed by car. When the restriction of rights is requested by the Judicial Police or the Public Prosecutor the measures provided for in paragraph 1 which have been urged for a maximum period of twenty four hours, within which the judge must rule on the request shall be deemed agreed, and agree on the relevance of the secrecy of the proceedings. Isolation and application of the detainee or prisoner of any of the exceptions referred to in the preceding paragraph will be decided by self whichever state the reasons justifying the adoption of each of the exceptions to the general rules in accordance with Article 509.

The judge effectively monitor the conditions in which solitary confinement is developed, for which purpose it may require information in order to determine the status of detainees or prisoners and respect for their rights.


3. Medical examinations of the detainee who was restricting the right to communicate with all or some of the people entitled to do so will be made with a frequency of at least two awards every twenty-four hours as a physician. "

Seven. heading of Title VIII of Book II, which shall read is amended as follows:

'TITLE VIII

Restrictive measures investigation of the rights recognized in Article 18 of the Constitution "

Eight. Articles 545 to 572 are grouped into a new Chapter I of Title VIII of Book II, whose signature is:

'CHAPTER I

From the entrance and registration closed instead "

Nine. Articles 573 to 578 are grouped into a new Chapter II of Title VIII of Book II, whose signature is:

'CHAPTER II

The record books and papers "

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

'CHAPTER III

Arrest and opening of written and telegraphic correspondence "

Once. Article 579, which shall read is amended as follows:

"Article 579. In the written or telegraphic correspondence.

1. The judge may order the detention of private correspondence, postal and telegraphic, including faxes, burofaxes and turns, the investigation send or receive, as well as opening or examination, if there were evidence obtained by these means the discovery or verification some fact or circumstance relevant to the cause, if any research has the object of the following offenses:

1st intentional crimes punished with capped of at least three years in prison.

2nd Crimes committed within a group or criminal organization.

3.º terrorist offenses.

2. The judge may decide at a reasoned decision for a period of three months, renewable for the same or shorter periods to a maximum of eighteen months, the observation post and telegraph communications researched and communications which serve to carry out their criminal purposes.

3. In case of emergency, when such investigations for the investigation of crimes related to the activities of armed bands or terrorist elements and there are serious reasons that make necessary the measure provided for in the preceding paragraphs of this article may sort the Minister of Interior or in his absence, the Secretary of State for Security. This measure shall immediately inform the competent court and in any case within a maximum period of twenty four hours, stating the reasons justifying the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the way it was carried out and its outcome. The competent court also reasoned, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum period of seventy-two hours since the measure was ordered.

4. No judicial authorization is required in the following cases:

A) Mailings that, by its own external characteristics are not usually used to contain personal correspondence but to serve the transportation and freight traffic or outside of which recorded its content is made.

B) Any other ways of sending correspondence under the legal form of open communication, which becomes mandatory declaration of an external content or incorporating the express indication that inspection is authorized.

C) When the inspection is conducted in accordance with the customs legislation or appropriate in accordance with the postal regulations governing a particular class of consignment.

5. The application and subsequent proceedings relating to the requested measure shall be conducted in a separate and secret part, without the secret cause expressly agreed. "

Twelve. A new article 579 bis, which reads as follows is created:

"Article 579 bis. Using the information obtained in a separate procedure and serendipity.

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, we will proceed to the deduction of testimony of individuals required to prove the legitimacy of the interference. the initial application for adoption will be included among the essential background, in any case, the court decision and agreed that all requests and judgments extension relapses in the original proceedings.


3. The continuation of this measure for criminal investigations accidentally discovered requires authorization of the competent judge, for which, it checks the diligence of the performance, evaluating the context in which there was the chance discovery and the impossibility of having requested as include it in time. Also it is informed if the proceedings continue declared secret, to the effect that such statement is respected in other criminal proceedings, communicating the time that the secret to rise. "

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

'CHAPTER IV

Common to the interception of telephone and telematic communications provisions, the collection and recording of oral communications using electronic devices, the use of technical monitoring devices, location and image capture, recording storage devices massive information and records on remote computers

Article 588 bis. Guiding Principles.

1. During the investigation of the causes may resolve some of the investigative measures covered in this chapter provided that there is full judicial authorization enacted subject to the principles of specialty, suitability, exceptionality, necessity and proportionality of the measure.

2. The principle of specification requires that a measure is related to the investigation of a particular crime. No measures may be authorized technological research aimed at preventing or discovering crime or clear suspicions without factual basis.

3. The principle of suitability will define the objective and subjective scope and duration of the measure under its usefulness.

4. In application of the principles of exceptionality and may only need to remember the measure:

A) when they are not available to the research, in view of their characteristics, other measures less onerous for the fundamental rights of the investigated or prosecuted and equally useful for the clarification of the facts, or

B) when the discovery or verification of the investigated fact, the determination of its author, the investigation of his whereabouts or the location of the effects of crime is severely hampered without resorting to this measure.

5. The investigative measures covered in this chapter are only deemed to have been provided when taken into account all the circumstances of the case, the sacrifice of the rights and interests affected does not exceed the benefit of its adoption prove to the public and third-party interest. For the weighting of conflicting interests, the assessment of the public interest will be based on the seriousness of the act, its social significance or technological level of production, the intensity of existing evidence and the relevance of the result pursued by restricting the right.

Article 588 bis b. Request for judicial authorization.

1. The judge may decide the measures covered in this chapter of its own motion or request of the prosecution or the Judicial Police.

2. When the prosecutor or the judicial police request the judge a measure of technological research, the request shall contain:
1st
The description of the event under investigation and the identity of the investigation or any other affected by the measure, provided that such data may be known.

2.º detailed statement of the reasons justifying the necessity of the measure in accordance with the guiding principles set out in Article 588 bis, as well as evidence of criminality that have become apparent during the previous investigation the application for authorization of the act of interference.

3.º identification data investigated or prosecuted and, if necessary, the media used that allow the execution of the measure.

4.º The extension of the measure specifying its content.
The investigative unit of the judicial police who will take care of the intervention
5th.

6.º The embodiment of the measure.

7th The duration of the measure sought.

8th The subject must carry out the measure, if known.

Article 588 bis c. judicial decision.

1. The judge will authorize or deny the action requested by reasoned order, after hearing the prosecution. This decision shall be made within a maximum twenty-four hours after the application is submitted.


2. Whenever necessary to resolve on compliance with any of the requirements expressed in the previous articles, the judge may require, with the term interruption in the preceding paragraph, an extension or clarification of the terms of the application concerns.

3. The court order authorizing the measure specified at least the following:

A) The offense under investigation and their legal qualification, stating the probable cause in which melts the measure.

B) The identity of the investigation and any other affected by the measure, if known.

C) The extension of the measure of interference, specifying its scope and motivation concerning compliance with the guiding principles set out in Article 588 bis.

D) The judicial police investigative unit that will take care of the intervention.

E) The duration of the measure.

F) The manner and frequency with which the applicant must inform the judge about the results of the measure.

G) The aim pursued by the measure.

H) The subject must carry out the measure, if known, specifically mentioning the duty of cooperation and secrecy, where appropriate, under penalty of committing a crime of disobedience.

Article 588 bis d. Secret.

The application and subsequent proceedings relating to the requested measure shall be conducted in a separate and secret part, without the secret cause expressly agreed.

Article 588 bis e. Duration.

1. The measures covered in this chapter shall have the duration specified for each of them and may not exceed necessary to clarify the facts.

2. The measure may be extended, by reasoned order by the judge, ex officio or upon reasoned request of the applicant, as long as the causes that motivated it.

3. After the period for which he was granted the measure, without its extension has been agreed, or, where appropriate, finalized, will cease for all purposes.

Article 588 bis f. Request for an extension.

1. The extension request shall be addressed by the prosecutor or the judicial police to judge sufficiently in advance to the expiration of the period granted. It must include in any case:

A) A detailed report of the measurement result.

B) The reasons for the continuation of the same.

2. Within the next two days to the submission of the application, the judge will decide on the extent to or extension by reasoned order. Before taking the decision may request clarification or further information.

3. Granted extra time, your computer will start from the date of expiry of the agreed measure.

Article 588 bis g. Control of the measure.

The Judicial Police will inform the Coroner development and results of the measure, in the form and at intervals to determine this and in any case, when for any reason an end to it.

Article 588 bis h. Involvement of third parties.

May be agreed research measures covered in the following chapters even when involving third parties in the cases and under the conditions governed by the specific provisions each.

Article 588 bis i. Using the information obtained in a separate procedure and serendipity.

The use of information obtained in a separate procedure and serendipity be regulated in accordance with Article 579 bis.
Article 588 bis
j. Termination of the measure.

The judge shall order the cessation of the measure when the circumstances justifying its adoption or apparent that through it are not getting the desired results, and, in any case, has elapsed disappear when the term for which he had been authorized.

Article 588 bis k. Destruction of records.

1. Once the procedure has been terminated by a final ruling, clearing and removal of the original records that can be included in the electronic and computer systems used in the execution of the measure ordered. a copy custody of the clerk is retained.

2. the destruction of the preserved copies will remember when five years have elapsed since the death penalty was executed or when the criminal prosecution or punishment has been prescribed or has been declared free dismissal or has been a final acquittal with respect to the investigation, provided it was not conservation precise judgment of the Court.


3. The Court shall pass appropriate to the Judicial Police to carry destruction effect referred to in the preceding paragraphs orders. "

Catorce. It is created in Title VIII of Book II a new Chapter V with the following heading and content:

'CHAPTER V

The interception of telephone and telematic 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 at any object of offenses that Article 579.1 of this law or crimes committed through computer tools or any other means information technology or communication or communication service.

Article 588 ter b. Ambit.

1. Terminals or media object of intervention must be those regularly or occasionally used by the investigation.

2. The court agreed intervention may authorize access to the content of communications and electronic data or traffic associated with the communication process as well as those arising independently of the establishment or not of a specific communication, which involved the subject investigated, either as a sender or recipient, and may affect the terminals or the media of the investigation is the owner or user.

May also interpose terminals or media of the victim when it is likely a serious risk to their life or integrity.

For the purposes specified in this Article, electronic means traffic data or associated all those that are generated as a result of conducting communication through an electronic communications network, its availability to the user, as well as the provision of a service society or telematic information of a similar nature.

Article 588 ter c. Affectation to third.

It may be agreed judicial interception of communications issued from terminals or telematic communication means belonging to a third person provided that:

1st there is evidence that the research subject that uses to transmit or receive information, or

2.º the holder collaborate with the person under investigation in their illicit purposes or benefits from their activity.

May also be authorized such intervention when the device under investigation be used maliciously by others electronically, without knowledge of its owner.

Article 588 ter d. Request for judicial authorization.

1. The request for judicial authorization must contain, in addition to the requirements referred to in Article 588 bis b, the following:

A) the identification number of subscriber terminal or the technical label,

B) identification of the connection object of the intervention or

C) data necessary to identify the means of telecommunication concerned.

2. To determine the extent of the measure, the application for judicial approval may be by any object of the following:

A) Registration and recording the content of the communication, indicating the form or type of communications that are affected.

B) Knowledge of their origin or destination, the moment in which communication takes place.

C) The geographical location of the origin or destination of the communication.

D) Knowledge of other related traffic data or not associated but added value to communication. In this case, the request shall specify the specific data to be obtained.

3. In case of emergency, when such investigations for the investigation of crimes related to the activities of armed bands or terrorist elements and there are serious reasons that make necessary the measure provided for in the preceding paragraphs of this article may sort the Minister of Interior or in his absence, the Secretary of State for Security. This measure shall immediately inform the competent court and in any case within a maximum period of twenty four hours, stating the reasons justifying the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the way it was carried out and its outcome. The competent court also reasoned, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum period of seventy-two hours since the measure was ordered.

Article 588 ter e. Duty to cooperate.


1. All providers of telecommunications services, access to a telecommunications network or services of the information society, and anyone who in any way contribute to facilitate communications via the telephone or any other means or system telematics, logical or virtual communication, are required to provide the judge, the prosecutor and the judicial police officers appointed to practice as assistance and collaboration necessary to facilitate compliance with the orders of interception of telecommunications.

2. The subjects required to provide cooperation shall be obliged to secrecy about the activities required by the authorities.

3. The obligors who fail to fulfill the above duties may incur crime of disobedience.

Article 588 ter f. Control of the measure.

In compliance with Article 588 bis g, the Judicial Police made available to the judge, at intervals determined that this and other digital media, the transcription of passages considered relevant and integrity recordings . the origin and destination of each will be indicated and shall ensure, through a sealing system or advanced electronic signature or system sufficiently reliable adveración, authenticity and integrity of the information dumped from the host computer to digital media in the communications had been recorded.

Article 588 ter g. Duration.

The maximum initial duration of the intervention, which is calculated from the date of judicial authorization, shall be three months, renewable for successive periods of equal duration to the maximum period of eighteen months.

Article 588 ter h. Request for an extension.

For the basis of the request for the extension, the Judicial Police will provide, if necessary, transcription of those passages which talks relevant to decide on the maintenance of the measure deducted information.

Before taking the decision, the judge may request clarification or additional information, including the full contents of the tapped conversations.

Article 588 ter i. Party access to the recordings.

1. He lifted the secrecy and expired the validity of the intervention measure, to copy parts of recordings and transcriptions will be delivered. If there were recording data concerning intimate aspects of the lives of people, only recording and transcribing those parts that do not relate to them will be given. Failure to include all the delivered recording transcript will be stated expressly.

2. Once examined the recordings and the deadline set by the judge, in response to the volume of information in the media, either party may request the inclusion on the copies of those communications to understand relevant and have been excluded. The judge, heard or examined by other such communications, decide its exclusion or joining the cause.

3. will be notified by the judge to the persons involved in intercepted communications the fact the practice of interference and be informed of the specific communications in which it has participated to be affected, unless it is impossible, require a disproportionate effort or they could harm future research. If the person notified request will be given copy of the recording or transcription of such communications, to the extent that this does not affect the right to privacy of others or be contrary to the purposes of the process under which it has taken the measure of interference.
Section 2
Transposition process electronic traffic data or associated
Article 588 ter
j. data contained in automated files service providers.

1. Electronic data held by service providers or individuals that facilitate communication in compliance with legislation on data retention on electronic communications or on its own initiative for commercial reasons or otherwise and which are linked to communication processes, they may only be transferred for incorporation into the process with judicial authorization.


2. When knowledge of this data is indispensable for research, will be asked the judge permission to collect the information contained in the automated files of service providers, including crisscross or intelligent data search, provided that the nature of be required data that has to be known and the reasons for the transfer.

SECTION 3. Access to data necessary for the identification of users, terminals and connectivity devices

Article 588 ter k. Identification by IP number.

When in the exercise of the functions of prevention and detection of crimes committed on the Internet, the Judicial Police agents have access to an IP address that was being used to commit a crime and not mention the identification and location computer or device corresponding connectivity or the personal user iD, request the judge to require agents subject to the duty of cooperation under Article 588 ter and the transfer of data to allow the identification and location terminal or device connectivity and identification of the suspect.

Article 588 ter l. Terminal identification codes by Sensing Device ID or its components.

1. Whenever under investigation had not been possible to obtain a certain number of paid and this is indispensable for the purposes of the investigation, agents of the Judicial Police may make use of technical devices that allow access to the knowledge of the identification codes or technical labels telecommunication device or any of its components, such as the IMSI or IMEI numbers and, in general, any technical means, according to the state of technology, is capable of identifying the communication equipment used or the card used to access the telecommunications network.

2. After obtaining the codes that allow identification of the device or any of its components, agents of the Judicial Police may apply to the competent judge the interception of communications in the terms set out in Article 588 ter d. The application shall apprise the court the use of the devices in the preceding paragraph refers to.

The court shall issue a reasoned decision granting or denying the application for action within the period laid down in Article 588 bis c.

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

When, in the exercise of their duties, the prosecutor or the judicial police need to know the ownership of a phone number or any other means of communication, or, conversely, require the phone number or data identification of any media, they may address themselves directly to providers of telecommunications services, access to a telecommunications network or services of the information society, who will be required to meet the requirement, under penalty of committing the crime of disobedience. "
Fifteen
. It is incorporated in Title VIII of Book II a new Chapter VI with the following heading and content:

'CHAPTER VI

Capturing and recording of oral communications using electronic devices
Article 588 quater
a. Recording direct voice communications.

1. You may be authorized placement and use of electronic devices that enable the capture and recording direct voice communications to be maintained by the investigation, on the street or other open space, at home or in any other enclosed places.

The listening and recording devices may be placed both outside and inside the home or indoors.

2. In the event that the entry into the home or in any of the spaces for the exercise of privacy is required, the enabling resolution will extend its motivation to the origin of the access to these places.

3. Listening and recording private conversations can be supplemented with imaging when expressly authorized by the agreed judgment.

Article 588 quater b. Budgets.


1. The use of the devices in the previous article must be linked to communications that may take place in one or more specific investigated encounters with others and whose predictability is evidence revealed by the investigation concerns.

2. May be authorized only when the following requirements:

A) That the facts under investigation are constituents of any of the following offenses:

1st intentional crimes punished with capped of at least three years in prison.

2nd Crimes committed within a group or criminal organization.

3.º terrorist offenses.

B) reasonably may be expected that the use of the devices and provide essential evidence relevant to the clarification of the facts and identifying its author data.

Article 588 quater c. Content of the judgment.

The court order authorizing the measure shall contain, in addition to the requirements governed by Article 588 bis c, a specific mention of the place or premises, as well as meetings of the investigation that will be under surveillance.

Article 588 quater d. Control of the measure.

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

The report shall identify all actors who participated in the implementation and monitoring of the measure.

Article 588 quater e. Cessation.

Ceased far by any of the grounds provided for in Article 588 bis j, recording conversations that take place in other meetings or capturing images of such moments require a new judicial authorization. "

Sixteen. It is added in Title VIII of Book II a new Chapter VII the following entry and content:

'CHAPTER VII

Use of technical devices for image capture, tracking and location

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

1. The Judicial Police may collect and record by any means technical images of the investigated person when you are in a public place or space, if necessary to facilitate identification, locating instruments and effects of crime or obtain relevant data to clarify of the facts.

2. The measure may be carried out even if it affects different people under investigation, provided that otherwise reduce relevantly the usefulness of monitoring or there is a real indication of the relationship of these persons with the investigation and the facts of the investigation.

Article 588 d b. Using devices or technical means of tracking and tracing.

1. Where there are accredited reasons of necessity and the measure is provided, the judge may authorize the use of devices or technical means of tracking and tracing.

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

3. Providers, agents and persons referred to in Article 588 ter and are required to provide the judge, the prosecutor and the agents of the Judicial Police appointed to practice as assistance and collaboration necessary to facilitate compliance with the cars for which monitoring is ordered, under penalty of committing a crime of disobedience.

4. Where there are urgent reasons to do reasonably fear that is not immediately placed the device or technical means of tracking and tracing investigation will be frustrated, the Judicial Police may proceed to their placement, realizing as soon as possible, and in any case the maximum period of twenty-four hours to the judicial authorities, who may ratify the action taken or agree to an immediate halt in the same period. In the latter case, the information obtained from the device placed shall have no effect on the process.

Article 588 d c. Duration of the measure.

1. The extent of use of technical devices tracking and tracing foreseen in the previous article will have a maximum of three months from the date of authorization. Exceptionally, the judge may grant successive extensions for the same or lower term to a maximum of eighteen months if it is justified in view of the results obtained with the measure.


2. The Judicial Police will give the judge the authentic original media or electronic copies containing the information collected when it is requested and, in any case, when completed investigations.

3. The information obtained through the technical devices for tracking and tracing those mentioned in the above items shall be properly guarded to prevent their misuse. "

Seventeen. It is created in Title III of Book II a new Chapter VIII with the following heading and content:

'CHAPTER VIII
Registration
devices
mass storage
Article 588 sexies to. Need for individualized motivation.

1. When during the practice of a house search predictable apprehension of computers, instruments telephone or telematic devices or mass storage of digital information or access to telematic data repositories, the resolution of the judge shall extend its reasoning justification, if any, of the reasons that legitimize entitled to access the information contained in such devices agents.

2. The simple seizure of any of the devices in the preceding paragraph, practiced during the course of the stagecoach house search, no legitimate access to their content, notwithstanding that such access may be subsequently authorized by the competent court concerns .

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

The requirement in paragraph 1 of the preceding article shall also apply to cases in which computers, communication tools or mass storage devices data, or access to telematic data repositories, are perceived independently of a house search. In such cases, agents will inform the judge seizure of such effects. If it considers essential access to information held in its content, will grant the authorization.

Article 588 ce. judicial authorization.

1. The resolution of the judge by which access to the information contained in the devices that this section refers to is authorized, it shall determine the terms and scope of registration and may authorize the copying of computer data. It shall also determine the conditions necessary to ensure data integrity and preservation guarantees to enable, where appropriate, the practice of an expert opinion.

2. Unless they constitute the object or instrument of crime or there are other reasons to justify the seizure of physical media containing data or computer files will be avoided, as this would cause serious damage to the holder or owner and possible obtaining a copy of them in conditions that guarantee the authenticity and integrity of the data.

3. When those carrying out registration or have access to the information system or a part thereof as provided in this chapter, they have good reason to believe that the data sought is stored in another computer system or part of it, may expand registration, provided that the data is lawfully accessible through the initial system or available for this. This extension of the registration must be authorized by the judge, unless it had already been in the initial authorization. In urgent cases, the judicial police or the prosecutor may carry out, informing the judge immediately, and in any case within a maximum period of twenty-four hours of the action taken, the way it was carried out and its outcome. The competent court also reasoned, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum period of seventy-two hours since it was ordered interception.

4. In urgent cases where a legitimate constitutional interest that makes necessary the measure provided for in the preceding paragraphs of this article, the Judicial Police may conduct direct examination of the data contained in the seized device, communicating immediately appreciate, and in any case within a maximum period of twenty-four hours writing led to the judge, stating the reasons justifying the adoption of the measure, the action taken, the way it was made and its result. The competent court also reasoned, revoke or confirm such action within a maximum period of 72 hours since the measure was ordered.


5. The authorities and officials responsible for the investigation may order any person who knows the operation of the computer system or measures applied to protect the computer data therein to provide the information necessary, provided that it does not derive a disproportionate burden for the affected, under penalty of committing a crime of disobedience.

This provision shall not apply to the investigated or prosecuted, persons who are exempted from the obligation to testify because of kinship and those that, in accordance with Article 416.2, can not declare under professional secrecy '. | || Eighteen
. It is incorporated in Title VIII of Book II a new Chapter IX, with the following entry and content:

'CHAPTER IX

Records on remote computers
Article 588 septies
a. Budgets.

1. The judge may authorize the use of identification data and codes as well as the installation of a software that allow remotely and telematic form, the examination distance and without knowledge of the owner or user of the contents of a computer device electronic, computer system, instrument mass storage of computer data or database, always pursuing the investigation of any of the following offenses:

A) Crimes committed within criminal organizations.

B) Crimes of terrorism.

C) Crimes committed against minors or persons judicially modified capacity.

D) Crimes against the Constitution, treason and related to national defense.

E) Crimes committed through computer tools or any other information technology or telecommunications or communication service.

2. The judicial resolution authorizing the registration shall specify:

A) computers, electronic devices, computer or part of the same systems, computer data storage media or databases, data or other digital content object of the measure.

B) The scope of it, the way we will proceed to access and seizure of data or computer files relevant to the case and the software through which control information is executed.

C) authorized agents to implement the measure.

D) The authorization, if any, for the realization and maintenance of copies of computer data.

E) Precise for preserving the integrity of the stored data as well as the inaccessibility or deleting such data the computer system that measures have been accessed.

3. When officers carrying out remote logging have reason to believe that the data sought is stored in another computer system or part thereof, will this fact to the judge, who may authorize an extension of the terms of registration.

Article 588 septies b. Duty to cooperate.

1. Service providers and persons referred to in Article 588 ter ey holders or responsible for the computer system or database object registration are required to provide researchers agents precise collaboration for the practice of measurement and system access. They are also obliged to provide the necessary data and information collected can be reviewed and viewing assistance.

2. The authorities and officials responsible for the investigation may order any person who knows the operation of the computer system or measures applied to protect the computer data therein to provide the information necessary for the successful completion of diligence.

This provision shall not apply to the investigated or prosecuted, persons who are exempted from the obligation to declare by reason of kinship, and those that, in accordance with Article 416.2, can not declare under professional secrecy.

3. The subjects required to provide cooperation shall be obliged to secrecy about the activities required by the authorities.

4. The subjects referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall be subject to liability regulated in paragraph 3 of Article 588 ter e.

Article 588 f c. Duration.

The measure will have a maximum duration of one month, renewable for equal periods up to three months. "
Nineteen
. It is created in Title VIII of Book II a new chapter X with the following entry and content:

'CHAPTER X


Assurance measures

Article 588 octies. Order data retention.

The Prosecutor or the Judicial Police may require any natural or legal person the conservation and protection of data or specific information contained in a computer storage system that are available until the corresponding judicial authorization to obtain transfer in accordance with the preceding articles.

The data is retained for a maximum period of ninety days, extendable once until the transfer is authorized or meet one hundred eighty days.

The required shall be obliged to render assistance and to keep secret the development of this diligence, being subject to the liability described in paragraph 3 of Article 588 · ter e. "
Twenty
. paragraph 1 of Article 967, which reads as follows is modified:

"1. In the citations that are made to the complainant, the offended or injured and the investigation for the trial, they will be informed that they may be assisted by counsel if they wish and they must go to court with the evidence they try avail. A citation investigated copy of the complaint or the complaint has been filed shall be accompanied.

Without prejudice to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, for the prosecution of minor offenses punishable by a fine whose maximum limit is at least six months, the general rules of defense and representation shall apply. "

Veintiuno. Replacing terms.

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

3. Article 141 the term "charged or prosecuted" is replaced by "investigated or prosecuted".

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

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

First additional provision. Forecast costs.

The measures included in this standard shall not result in increased staffing or remuneration or other staff costs.

Second additional provision. Replacing references.

The provisions of other legislation relating to the interception of telephone or telematic communications under Article 579 of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be considered as referenced to the provisions of Title VIII of Book II of the Act .

Single transitional provision. Applicable legislation.

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

2. The law will also apply to police and tax proceedings, judgments and actions agreed upon its entry into force in criminal proceedings pending.

Single derogatory provision. Repeal of rules.

Repealed Articles 387 and 395 of the Criminal Procedure Act and any provisions contrary to the provisions of this law.

First final provision. Modification of the Organic Law 6/1985 of 1 July, of the Judiciary.

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

One. a new paragraph is added 5th paragraph 1 of Article 57.

"5th autonomous procedures forfeiture for crimes for which knowledge are competent."

Two. a new paragraph 7TH Article 65, which replaces the current that becomes the 8th paragraph is added:

"7th autonomous procedures forfeiture for crimes for which knowledge are competent.

8.º any other matter assigned to it by law. "

Three. A new letter e) is added to paragraph 3 of Article 73, with the following wording:

"E) autonomous confiscation procedures for offenses for which knowledge are competent."

Four. the second paragraph of section 2.º is modified, and added a new paragraph 6th paragraph 1 of Article 82, which are worded as follows:

"2nd Of the funds provided by law against decisions by the Courts of Criminal Instruction and the province.


To the knowledge of appeals against decisions of the trial courts in trials for minor offenses the Court shall constitute a single judge, by a shift of distribution. "

"6th autonomous procedures forfeiture for crimes for which knowledge are competent."

Five. letter b) is amended and a new letter h) is added to paragraph 1 of Article 87, which are worded as follows:

"B) They also corresponds with its judgment under indictment in cases established by law and acceptance processes by decree."

"H) procedures autonomous confiscation for the crimes for which knowledge are competent."

Six. paragraph 2 of Article 89a which reads as follows amendments:

'2. The Criminal Courts prosecute cases of felonies determined by law.

To facilitate understanding of the cases investigated by the Courts of Violence against Women, and considering the number of existing issues, should specialize one or more courts in each province, in accordance with the provisions of Article 98 this Act.

Also within the Criminal Courts enforcement of judgments in cases involving serious or less serious by trial courts offense, recognition and enforcement of decisions imposing financial penalties by the competent authorities of other States transmitted members of the European Union, when the same be fulfilled in Spanish territory and autonomous confiscation procedures for offenses for which knowledge are competent. "

Seven. paragraph 3 of Article 89a which reads as follows amendments:

'3. In the Villa de Madrid, with jurisdiction throughout Spain, there will be one or more Central Criminal Courts to know, in cases where so established by procedural laws, the causes for the crimes that Article 65 refers to and of other matters by the law.

Also corresponds to the Central Criminal Courts enforcement of judgments in cases involving serious or less serious by the Central Courts of Instruction crime and autonomous confiscation procedures for offenses for which knowledge are competent. "| ||
Second final provision. competential title.

This law is issued under the jurisdiction attributed exclusively to the State Article 149.1.6.ª of the Spanish Constitution concerning procedural law.

The first final provision is issued under the exclusive competence of Article 149.1.5.ª of the Spanish Constitution in the administration of justice.

Final disposition third. Incorporation of European Union law.

This law is incorporated into Spanish law Directive 2013/48 / EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right to assistance of counsel in criminal proceedings and in proceedings relating the EAW, and the right to report to a third party at the time of deprivation of liberty and to communicate with others and with consular authorities during the detention.

Fourth final provision. Entry into force.

This law shall enter into force two months after its publication in the "Official Gazette", except for sections one, three, four, five and six of the only article they will on 1 November 2015

Therefore

Command all Spaniards, individuals and authorities to observe and enforce this Act.

Madrid, October 5, 2015.
FELIPE R.


The Prime Minister,
MARIANO
Rajoy Brey