In Elche, the Supreme Court has again issued a ruling that allows an inspectable permanent prison. The decision, confirmed by Supreme Court sources, concerns a couple charged in the death of a two-year-old boy. The defendants, the child’s biological mother and her partner, were tried in the Provincial Court after a public jury found them guilty, but those verdicts were later overturned by the Community High Court of Justice and replaced with 20-year sentences for each. This morning the plenary session of the Supreme Court reaffirmed the maximum penalty under the Spanish Penal Code. Legal observers wonder whether such punishment can be imposed when the crime against a minor involves aggravating treason factors. The defense attorney, Miguel Angel Canovas, argued that the punishment had already been intensified by the use of a factor that aggravates the murder of a child. The court had previously ruled that the sentence was excessive in this case, noting that the defendants brought the child to a hospital and that the mother did not participate directly. The case concerns the events that led to the death of Aarón in Elche during September 2018, a tragedy that has raised questions about how to apply stringent penalties in cases involving minors.
This marks the second recent Supreme Court decision supporting the use of a reviewable permanent prison, following another ruling publicized earlier this week. That other decision upheld the imposition of this sentence on a man who killed his own family members at home in the Juan XXIII neighborhood of Alicante. The General Assembly of the Criminal Chamber accepted the measure by a large majority, with 12 votes to 4 in favor and against the appeal raised by the defense counsel Rachel Sanchez Navarro. The Prosecutor’s Office continues to review the decision of the Valencia High Court that annulled the original permanent imprisonment sentence issued by the Alicante Court. The chamber upheld the court’s verdict and the panel’s report, and the judges who voted against were Susana Polo, Leopoldo Puente, Antonio del Moral, Andrés Martínez Arrieta, and Andrés Palomo. The issue before the General Assembly concerns the application of an examineable permanent prison to cases involving the murder of a minor and whether the penalty for murder, already involving treason, should be extended within the Penal Code. In the coming days the sentence will be made public as legal arguments are weighed by the magistrates.
The debate centers on the principle of law that prohibits trying and convicting someone twice for the same act, known as no double jeopardy. The Constitutional Court recently addressed this issue when the Supreme Court of Appeals raised the question of permanent imprisonment in certain sentences. However, the content of the current ruling remains undisclosed, and the Supreme Court has reaffirmed its own case law that maintains the reviewable permanent prison as compatible with the death of a child caused by treachery.
At Alicante, the court previously sentenced the couple to terms that suggested probable prison time, with both the mother and the partner convicted of aggravated murder for the act against the minor and of aggravated abuse with treason. The Valencia High Court later reversed this extreme sentence and replaced it with 23 years in prison per person: twenty years for murder and three for ill-treatment. The court noted that while the defendants mistreated the boy and were aware of the danger, they transported him to a hospital when the severity of Aaron’s condition became apparent. The reduction reflected a mitigation assessment that foreclosed a compensation measure presented as extraordinary or of special seriousness, a distinction that the Supreme Court has now revised in its latest stance.
The incidents unfolded at the family home in Elche, where the couple lived with the child and where Aarón had previously suffered multiple injuries. On September 13, 2018, the man beat the boy, slapping and punching him, striking a surface, and applying pressure to the neck so intensely that the child lost consciousness. The mother, present at the scene, acknowledged the seriousness of the situation but did not intervene to protect the child. He was taken to hospital but died there on September 17. An autopsy identified anoxic encephalopathy as the primary cause of death, while doctors cited various injuries consistent with long-standing mistreatment.
The broader legal discussion continues to address how to balance the severity of punishment with the realities of abuse in a household setting, particularly when the death occurs as a result of sustained mistreatment. The case is closely watched for its potential implications on how permanent imprisonment could be applied in future prosecutions involving the murder of minors and the spectrum of aggravating factors that accompany such charges. Source notes: Supreme Court records and related judicial opinions confirm the current trajectory of this legal debate and its ongoing interpretation by Spanish courts.