{"id":11522,"date":"2023-06-14T11:56:55","date_gmt":"2023-06-14T09:56:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.in-diem.com\/abogados\/uncategorized\/legal-differences-between-minor-and-serious-disobedience-offenses"},"modified":"2026-03-13T13:51:47","modified_gmt":"2026-03-13T12:51:47","slug":"legal-differences-between-minor-and-serious-disobedience-offenses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.in-diem.com\/en\/abogados\/criminal\/legal-differences-between-minor-and-serious-disobedience-offenses","title":{"rendered":"Legal Differences Between Minor and Serious Disobedience Offenses"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The legal differences between the SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE OFFENSE of Article 556.1 of the Criminal Code<\/a>, the LESS SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE OFFENSE of Article 556.2 of the Criminal Code<\/a>, and MINOR DISOBEDIENCE constituting an administrative infraction as set forth in the Organic Law on Citizen Security.<\/p>\n\n

1.-<\/strong> Serious Disobedience<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

Serious disobedience to authority is covered in Article 556.1 of the Criminal Code, within offenses against public order:<\/p>\n\n

\u201c1. Those who, without being included in Article 550, seriously resist or disobey authority or its agents in the exercise of their functions, or private security personnel, duly identified, who carry out private security activities in cooperation and under the command of the Security Forces and Corps, shall be punished with a prison sentence of three months to one year or a fine of six to eighteen months.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

It is necessary that the disobedience be serious and, furthermore, that said disobedience occurs in the face of a clear and express mandate from an agent of authority. It is important to note that this attitude must be conscious, precise, and clear to be punishable. <\/p>\n\n

The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its Judgment 459\/2019, of October 19, establishes the following:<\/p>\n\n

\u201cIndeed, it is understandable that on those occasions when the crime of disobedience is imputed to a private individual (cf. arts. 556, 348.4.c, 616 quater CP), the personal nature of the requirement acquires singular relevance. Only in this way <\/em>is the absurdity of a citizen being criminally convicted for the simple act of disregarding the abstract mandate inherent in an imperative norm avoided<\/em><\/strong>. Hence, the judgment of subsumption requires that <\/em>disregard for a personally notified order be verified<\/em><\/strong>, with the consequent legal warning that advises of the consequences of non-compliance.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

2.- Less Serious Disobedience<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

Less serious disobedience to authority is covered in Article 556.2 of the Criminal Code<\/p>\n\n

2. Those who disrespect and disregard authority, in the exercise of their functions, shall be punished with a fine of one to three months.<\/em><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Regarding less serious disobedience, covered in Article 556.2 of the Criminal Code, it is important to clarify that these are also typified as offenses, although the associated criminal sanction is lighter, as it involves a fine of 1 to 3 months.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

3<\/strong>.- Minor Disobedience<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

Minor disobedience<\/strong>, after the latest reform of the Criminal Code, the former minor disobedience offense against authority (the repealed art. 634 of the Criminal Code) is incorporated into the Organic Law on Citizen Security, thus becoming an administrative infraction.<\/p>\n\n

Ultimately, and in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, there IS NO OFFENSE when a FIRM ACT of OPPOSITION to the EXERCISE of POLICE WORK is NOT APPRECIATED.<\/p>\n\n

In this regard, citing SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT 45\/2016 of February 3 indicates that there is an absence of the typical conduct required for serious disobedience, or in other words, the offense covered by Article 556.1 of the Criminal Code has not been perpetrated, when:<\/p>\n\n

\u201c<\/em>a firm and stubborn act of opposition to the exercise of police work has not been appreciated<\/em><\/strong>. Although the terms used seem to refer more to cases of disobedience, the truth is that <\/em>they highlight the need to appreciate a certain seriousness in the conduct for it to be considered criminal<\/em><\/strong>, since in the legal situation prior to the reform of the Criminal Code by Organic Law 1\/2015, conviction for a minor offense against public order was still possible in the mildest cases.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

\u201cThat way of behaving, in a situation where, from an objective point of view, it is not recorded that the agents incurred in a reprehensible excess, is contrary to the rules of coexistence and finds its sanction in Article 634, insofar as the disturbance of police work by reproaching agents can be valued as a lack of respect and consideration for them in the exercise of their functions or, even, <\/em>as minor disobedience to their instructions<\/em><\/strong>. But in this case, they do not reach the necessary intensity to be considered constitutive of an offense, inasmuch as the appellant merely reacted against the action (\u2026) which is not recorded as having special significance.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

4.- We can help you<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

At IN DIEM Abogados<\/strong>, we have the best criminal law experts in cases of disobedience and resistance against authority offenses<\/strong>, and we guarantee at all times an unwavering defense of our client’s interests.<\/p>\n\n

Contact IN DIEM Abogados 24 hours a day, any day of the week, including holidays, without obligation.<\/p>\n\n

We guarantee the best possible outcome, whatever your case.<\/p>\n\n