The TS establishes in the 'Arandina case' that it is "obligatory" to apply the law of "only yes is yes" because it is "more favorable" to the prisoner

The Supreme Court magistrates warn that the penalties for crimes of sexual violence should be reviewed

MADRID, 14 Dic. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Supreme Court has established that the application of the Organic Law of Comprehensive Guarantee of Sexual Freedom, the so-called 'law of only yes is yes', is "obligatory" because it is "more favorable" to the prisoner, in the sentence handed down when resolving the appeals of the 'Arandina case', whose ruling was brought forward on November 29 but was known in its entirety this Wednesday.

The Supreme Court's decision to sentence two former Arandina players to 9 years in prison means raising the sentences of both convicted --from the 4 and 3 years that had been set by the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla y León (TSJCyL)-- after eliminate the extenuating factor that had been appreciated due to the closeness of age and maturity between the convicted person and the victim. The Prosecutor's Office requested 10 years in prison for both of them, but the court has left it one year less for the application of the 'law of only yes is yes'.

The Supreme Court has explained that "the accommodation of the sentence to the new criminal text after LO 10/2022 is mandatory because the retroactivity of the criminal law that is more favorable to the accused is applied by virtue of a more beneficial subsequent law, as in this case it has happened" .

In this sense, the magistrates have also pointed out that the process of reviewing sentences reaches "not only those that are in the execution phase, but also those that are in the sentencing phase, either in full completion of oral trial, either by virtue of a resolution of appeal or appeal, assessing whether the penalty to be imposed may be more beneficial".

The decision of the Criminal Chamber has had the particular vote of magistrate Ángel Luis Hurtado, who has understood that the analogical mitigation that the Castilian-Leonese Supreme Court already applied should have been maintained, with a slight reduction in sentences, considering it also more beneficial. the new law.