In 2006, the Supreme Court of Spain adopted the so-called “Parot Doctrine” in which it established that sentence reductions for prison benefits, including remission for work performed, was to apply to each sentence individually and not to the maximum term. The Parot Doctrine was recently challenged before the European Court of Human Rights and upheld as in violation of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights and the Parot Doctrine
The doctrine was challenged before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the case of Del Rio Prada v. Spain, involving a former member of the ETA sentenced to eight sentences, whose prison term was extended by nine years after being recalculated based on this Doctrine. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights upheld the 2012 decision of the Chamber and ordered Spain to release the applicant at the earliest possible date and pay just satisfaction along with costs and expenses for a violation of her rights, based on its determination that Spain had violated two key provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Spain: Parot Doctrine After the ECHR Decision
The Parot Doctrine was recently challenged before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The final decision from the Court reaffirmed the ECHR decision, which considered the Parot Doctrine in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Groups representing victims of terrorism have protested, expressing concerns about the release of ETA terrorists and common criminals and the effect it will have on Spanish society.
Last Updated: 03/30/2015