The Supreme Court confirms the conviction of the boss of a boat and his assistant for not proving that they also intended to migrate

MADRID, 25 Mar. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Supreme Court has confirmed the 4-year prison sentence imposed on the skipper of a boat and his assistant, considering that neither was able to prove that they also intended to migrate to Spain, which would have allowed their sentences to be lowered by applying a less severe version. of the crime against the rights of foreign citizens.

The magistrates have explained that it is possible to reduce the sentence when there is a "kinship link between the perpetrator of the crime and the passengers" or when it is proven that the defendants piloted the boat "as a means to pay for their own transportation to achieve immigration themselves. irregular", provided that "the risk of the crossing was not excessively high".

In this case, they have ensured that none of the aforementioned cases that allow them to modify the prison sentence is identified or accredited. As the court has underlined, the men have limited themselves to "invoking that with their action plan they also intended to immigrate due to the very diverse socio-economic conditions in which their country of origin is found, but they have not provided the slightest element of proof".

In the sentence, to which Europa Press has had access, the Criminal Chamber has reviewed the facts, which date back to July 2021, when the provincial maritime service of the Civil Guard located a "fiber boat" --of "insufficient size" to transport the 13 undocumented Algerian immigrants on board-- which was skippered by one of the two defendants and guided by the other.

In the resolution, for which Judge Javier Hernández has been a speaker, it is stated that the defendants acted in "collusion" with the rest of the people who were in the boat, who were charged between 2,000 and 5,000 euros "for their transfer to the Spanish coasts". According to the proven facts, "the trip took place largely at night, in a boat lacking all security measures and not suitable for making a trip from the African coast."

The Provincial Court of Almería sentenced the two defendants to 4 years and 2 months in prison each as perpetrators of a crime against the rights of foreign citizens. The men took the case before the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, where their appeal was partially upheld and their sentences were reduced to 4 years each.

Dissatisfied with the resolution, both went to the Supreme Court to review their case. They alleged that their right to the presumption of innocence had been violated and that an error had been made in the assessment of the evidence provided at trial.

Among other issues, the men insisted that the "significant contradictions" of the protected witnesses were not taken into account, nor the translation "errors", nor the quality of the recording - which they have described as "inaudible" -.

In 17 pages, the Criminal Chamber has dismissed the arguments, has supported the "reliability" of the witnesses and has ensured that it does not identify "neither the absence of evidence nor the lack of justification of the conclusions" reached by the court who handed down the sentence.

The convicts stressed that they, as "young people" and "without criminal records", also sought to "emigrate to Spain", while stressing that they have not been identified as part of any criminal organization or that they received any amount of what paid by the other occupants of the boat.

The Supreme Court has rejected this point, considering that they have not been able to prove that they also intended to migrate to Spain and recalling that the court ruling declared it proven that "a risk was created for the lives of the occupants of the boat because it lacked any measure of security".