Can we ask motivation in the agreement to grant reprieve? Commentary on the Judgment of the Supreme Court about motivation on reprieves (Judgment of 20 november 2013)

Authors

  • María Isabel Serrano Maíllo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5944/trc.34.2014.14068

Keywords:

Reprieve, prerogative of mercy, motivation, reasons of justice, fairness and social utility, prohibition of arbitrariness, gracious act,

Abstract

The judgment in question is a statement of great interest because it comes to changing the line of cases that held granting reprieve. The thing is that a Government´s partial reprieve was cancelled because it wasn´t not motivated. It is a very controversial decision. In fact, 19 of the 36 judges filed dissenting opinion, most of them referring to the issue of motivation. The controversy arises because the Act of Reprieve does not consider motivation as a mandatory element in the partial reprieves. It was mandatory until 1988, when it disappeared after the law reform. However, the Supreme Court based on the «spirit of the law»-reflected in the preamble and in Article 9.3 CE canceled the reprieve for not giving reasons of justice, equity or social utility for been granted.

Downloads

Published

2014-06-01

How to Cite

Serrano Maíllo, M. I. (2014). Can we ask motivation in the agreement to grant reprieve? Commentary on the Judgment of the Supreme Court about motivation on reprieves (Judgment of 20 november 2013). Teoría Y Realidad Constitucional, (34), 609–626. https://doi.org/10.5944/trc.34.2014.14068

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.