Go to content
I want to denounce

Procedure

The sanctioning procedure is governed by the Title IX of Law 2/2023 and, alternatively, by the Law 39/2015, of the Common Administrative Procedure (CAP). It always begins ex officio and respects the separation between instruction and resolution (art. 63.1 LPAC): the processing corresponds to the Department for Monitoring and Sanctioning Procedures of the Independent Authority for the Protection of the Informant (AIPI) and the resolution, the President of the AIPI.

The procedure must be resolved and notified within the maximum period of Three months, exceptionally expandable and motivated by another three; once that period has elapsed without resolution, the caducity. If evidence of an offence is found, the Department shall bring the facts to the attention of the Department of Public Prosecutions and, where appropriate, the proceedings shall be suspended. criminal prejudiciality (art. 22.1.g LPAC), in guarantee of the principle Non Bis in Idem.

Prior to the initiation, the Department for Monitoring and Sanctioning Procedures may carry out prior actions to clarify the facts, assess their relevance and identify the person allegedly responsible (art. 55 LPAC).

The Department agrees to initiate the procedure, identifying the person alleged to be responsible, the facts imputed and their possible qualification, the sanctions that may correspond, the instructing person —and, where appropriate, secretary— with their regime of abstention and disqualification, and stating that the body competent to resolve is the President of the AIPI (arts. 63 and 64 LPAC).

The person concerned has a time limit for making allegations, providing documents and proposing evidence to the instructor. If you do not state the time limit and the agreement contains a precise statement of responsibility, this may be done by means of a motion for a resolution (art. 64.2.f LPAC).

The designated instructing person in the Department carries out the necessary acts ex officio and opens, where appropriate, a probative period (arts. 75 to 77 LPAC).

Once the investigation has been completed, the Department makes a motion for a resolution — with the facts, their qualification, the infringement, the person responsible and the proposed sanction — and grants a hearing and raises the file to the President of the AIPI (arts. 89 and 82 LPAC).

The President of the AIPI issues a reasoned decision, which may not be based on facts other than those determined during the investigation (art. 90 LPAC).

The President ' s decision exhausts the administrative procedure; it is open to the President to file a motion for reconsideration and, in any event, to file an administrative complaint with the Contentious Section of the National High Court.